(navigation image)
Home American Libraries | Canadian Libraries | Universal Library | Community Texts | Project Gutenberg | Children's Library | Biodiversity Heritage Library | Additional Collections
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload
See other formats

Full text of "John Hart's pronunciation of English (1569-1570)"

PE 
373 




Anglistische Forschungen 

Herausgegeben von Dr. Johannes Hoops 

Professor an der Universitiit Heidelberg 
Heft 22 



JOHN HART'S 
PRONUNCIATION OF ENGLISH 

(1569 and 1570) 



BY 



OTTO JESPERSEN 



IsemTferB 






lAPtBTUSl^ 


'tiA 




3SI 


*_t 


t& 



Heidelberg 1907 

Carl Winter's Universitatsbuchhandlung 

Verlags-Archiv Nr. 183. 



Alle Rechte, besonders das Recht der ilbersetzuog in fremde Sprachen, 
werden vorbehalten. 



P£ 

2 03 



LIBRARY 

745807 
UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO 



Contents. 



•*" 



Sources 

Gill and Ellis on Hart 

Standard of Pronunciation 

Hart's Phonetic Equipment 

Syllabic consonants 

Aspirated stops 

Doublets 

Voice assimilations 

Other double forms 

And, an 

Hart's System compared with Bullokar's and Gill's . 

Hart's Practice 

The Sounds in Detail. Consonants 

Vowels 

(i 26. e 28. a 30. o 32. u 32) 

Diphthongs 

(e = ay, ey and o = ow 33. ei, ou 42. au 44. 
Other diphthongs and triphthongs 59) 

Gill's criticism 

Luick on Hart 

Word-Lists 

' (long) 

(short) stressed 

(short) unstressed 

ih 

ir stressed and unstressed 

ie* 

ie 

ieu 

iu 

e" (long) 

e (short) stressed 



iu 44. 



1. 
2. 

3. 

4. 

5. 

6. 

7. 

8. 

9. 

10. 

11. 



Page 
2 
5 
7 

10 
11 
13 
14 
14 
17 
18 
19 
23 
24 
26 

33 



59 
63 

65 
66 

67 
70 
73 

74 
74 
74 
74 
74 
75 
78 



IV Contents. 

Page 

§ 12. e (short) unstressed 81 

§ 13. er stressed 85 

§ 14. er unstressed 86 

§ 15. ei 89 

§ 16. e-a, ea 91 

§ 17. eau 91 

§ 18. eu 91 

§ 19. a' (long) 91 

§ 20. a (short) stressed 93 

§ 21. a (short) unstressed 95 

§ 22. ar stressed 97 

§ 23. ar unstressed 98 

§ 24. ai, ae 98 

§ 25. au 98 

§ 26. o- (long) 99 

§ 27. o (short) stressed 100 

§ 28. o (short) unstressed 102 

§ 29. oh, ouh 104 

§ 30. or 104 

§ 81. oi, oi 105 

§ 32. o-u 105 

§ 33. ou-, ou 106 

§ 34. u- (long) 107 

§ 35. u (short) stressed 107 

§ 36. u (short) unstressed 109 

§ 37. ur 110 

§ 38. ue", uei Ill 

§ 39. uo # , uo, uoa Ill 

§ 40. d 112 

§ 41. J) 113 

§ 42. z 114 

§ 43. s 116 

§ 44. h (medial and final) 119 

§ 45. Syllabic 1 120 

§ 46. Syllabic n 121 

§ 47. Syllabic r 121 

§ 48. d or t without vowel in the ending -ed .... 121 

§ 49. d' or d instead of de 122 

§ 50. t' instead of tu 123 



I have to thank my friend Professor G. C. Moore 
Smith and my two pupils Mr. H. Sorensen and Mr. Hel- 
weg Moller for assisting me in various ways during the 
writing and printing of this little volume. 



In my Studier over Engelske Kasus (Copenhagen 1891) 
I expressed my admiration of Hart's work with which I 
had been struck a year before when reading a number of 
early English phoneticians and orthoepists in the British 
Museum. My remarks led Dr. Furnivall to ask me, in 
1892, to edit Hart for the Early English Text Society. 
In 1893, I went once more systematically through the old 
authorities on English pronunciation, and then told 
Dr. Furnivall that I was ready to go to print. But fate, 
or the financial position of the Society, stood in my way; 
and having failed to get my edition printed by the Society 
even in the Horatian 'nine years', I have now obtained 
Dr. Furnivall's kind permission to print my word-lists 
with some short explanations in a separate volume and 
thus render generally accessible practically everything of 
importance in Hart's works. My reason for choosing this 
mode of proceeding instead of waiting for the texts to be 
printed is chiefly the constantly growing interest in early 
Modern English pronunciation. The last few years have 
seen quite a large number of publications on this subject, 
by Luick, Vietor, Franz, Jiriczek, Hauck, Ekwall, AVyld, 
and others; but in all these books and short papers, many 
of which are very important for the historical study of 
English, I have missed a just appreciation and a complete 
turning to account of the information contained in Hart's 
work, which seems to be known to most modern scholars 

Jespersen, John Hart's Pronunciation. 1 



2 Sources. 

only through Ellis' totally inadequate extracts. I shall 
be satisfied if this small volume contributes ever so little 
towards clearing up some of the numerous problems in- 
volved in the history of English sounds. 

Sources. 

We owe our knowledge of John Hart's pronunciation 
to three sources, namely, 

I. An autograph manuscript in the British Museum 
(Royal MSS. 17. C. VII) dated 1551.— This must be 
considered the first imperfect draught of his Orthographic, 
in which it is also mentioned as such. 

II. The printed book: AN ORTHO- | graphie, | con- 
teyning the due | order and reason, howe to | write or 
paint thimage of mannes | voice, most like to the life or | 
nature. Composed by | I. H. Chester | Heralt. | The con- 
tents whereof are | next folowing. | Sat cito si sat bene. | 
Anno. 1569. 

The latter part of this book (from leaf 47 b 1 ) is 
printed in phonetic characters and is the longest connected 
phonetic text printed before Sweet's Elemcntarbuch (1886). 
A collation of the two copies in the British Museum has 
shown me that the author must have corrected some mis- 
prints after some copies had already been struck off. 
Thus, to mention only two instances, on p. 55a G. 7481 
has the m in Icustum turned upside down, while 626 a. 3 
has it correct, On p. 64a the former copy reads "voels 
in . . . aulues befo'r 5em, as befo'r" and the latter "voelz 
in . . . auluez befoT dem, az befcrr." The correction of 



1 The pagination is wrong after p. 35, so that from the second 
32 to 59 each printed number must be increased by 4. Instead of 
43 we thus have to read 47. 



Sources. 3 

the turned letter may, of course, be due to the printer 
himself, but the correction of the ordinary spelling as to 
the phonetic az, of voels to voels, and of aulues to auluez 
would certainly be beyond the reach of an ordinary printer 
and must indubitably be ascribed to the author. In the 
following lists I have given only the spellings of the cor- 
rected copy. — This book is referred to below as O. 

HI. The printed book: A Methode or comfortable | 
beginning for all vnlearned, | whereby they may bee 
taught to | read English, in a very short time, | with 
pleasure: So profitable as | straunge, put in light, by | 

{Reason, j J Mother j 

Order, the Nurse 

Experience, i I Teacher I 

of al humain perfections | Imprinted at London, | by 
Henrie Denham. | Anno. 1570. — This book is referred to 
below as M. 

This valuable pamphlet has never been utilized till 
now, when I am happy to rescue it from oblivion. Though 
it is mentioned in the Dictionary of National Biography 
it was neither in the British Museum nor in any of the 
other great libraries when I called Dr. Furnivall's attention 
to its existence and to the desirability of reprinting it 
together with Hart's first work. Fortunately, some time 
after, Dr. Furnivall came across the title in a Manchester 
bookseller's catalogue and secured the copy, which is now 
in the British Museum. 

The book is a spelling-primer on phonetic principles. 
In the introduction Hart explains his principles of teaching 
children to read, which are essentially the same as are 
now, three and a half centuries later, only just beginning 

to be acknowledged and practised among a small set of 

1* 



Sources. 



"advanced" phoneticians and educationists. The old names 
of the letters are totally rejected, and the child is to begin 
with words and sentences written in a simple phonetic 
alphabet. 1 Apart from the pedagogical value of this 
introduction it contains some important passages that 
throw light on Hart's personality; these will be quoted 
presently. Then follows the spelling-book proper, con- 
taining, first, tables of sounds or letters, then isolated 
words and small colloquial sentences, and finally "the 
Lord's Prayer, Belief, and Ten Commandments," with 
Graces before and after meat. 

The method of transcription is a little different from 
that in the Orthographie, the chief difference being that a 
short vowel is often, in the middle of words, indicated 
by doubling the following consonant, while in Hart 
generally left it to be inferred from the want of the dot 
indicating length and only occasionally showed shortness 
by the strange device of writing an acute accent over the 
vowel. Other differences between O and M will be men- 
tioned below. 

There is a second copy of the Methode in the private 
library of Mr. Christie-Miller, of Britwell, Bucks. Curiously 
enough, it deviates in a few particulars from the British 
Museum copy; in the latter, the Ninth Commandment 
was left out by mistake, but the mistake was found out, 
and in the other copy it is rectified. To make space for 
the insertion, a few lines on the following page were in 

1 I may say here that I have myself taught my little son to 
read by means of phonetic texts and have found the method very 
successful; the subsequent transition to the ordinary spelling offered 
no difficulty whatever in spite of the unphonetic character of Danish 
spelling. Cf. also J. Spieser's article "Lautschrift" in Rein's Enzy- 
klopdd. Handbuch der Padagogik, zweite Ausg. 1906. 



Gill and Ellis on Hart. 5 

the second impression printed in a smaller type, but the 
change occasioned some other slips. In accordance with 
the then prevailing spelling vp-on was printed instead of 
zip-on in the first impression, the word lord was omitted, 
and de's was changed into the'z, a form in which an error 
has been introduced at the beginning, and a correction 
at the end. In the second impression the correct Jcre'tiur 
and U-si'-tfing were also inadvertently changed into kretiur 
and b'i-si'tf-ing. 

John Hart died on the 16 th of July, 1574. 

Gill and Ellis on Hart. 

Hart's Orthographie has been very little used by 
recent writers on the history of English sounds, and where 
it is mentioned, it is generally with a sneer. This is 
probably due to the depreciatory remarks made by Gill 
and Ellis. Of the former's criticism I shall have occasion 
to speak later; here I shall only remark that Gill, not- 
withstanding his criticism, applies to Hart's book or system 
of transcription the expression "bene facta." 

Ellis, on the other hand, in speaking of Hart's Ortho- 
graphie (Early Engl. Pronunciation I, p. 35) uses the words 
"a most disappointing book." He cannot, however, have 
read the book very carefully at that time, for he says 
that he has taken the name John Hart from the British 
Museum catalogue, overlooking the fact that the preface 
is headed in big letters, "To the doubtfull of the English 
Orthographie, Iohn Hart Chester heralt wisheth all health 
and prosperitie." Ellis says that "It seems probable that 
he was a Welshman," but the only evidence he adduces 
in support of this assertion is that Hart writes irld for 
would, "that is, he did not pronounce (wuu) as distinct 



6 Gill and Ellis on Hart. 

from (uu)." 1 It is interesting to see how this hasty con- 
jecture is repeated by other scholars; Wyld mentions Hart 
as "according to Ellis, probably a Welshman" (Historical 
Study of the Mother Tongue, 1906, p. 303), and Ekwall 
speaks of him and Salesbury as "Welsh orthoepists" 
without the least shadow of doubt, saying in another 
place that "Loss of initial w before [u], [u] is rarely men- 
tioned by early orthoepists, except Welshmen, as Sales- 
bury and Hart, who are not trustworthy authorities" 
(Dr. John Jones's Practical Phonography, Halle 1907, § 531 
and 543). 

Now, the proof is not conclusive, for a great many 
English dialects leave out [w] before [u] in such words as 
would, woman. Besides, Hart is not a Welsh name, and 
there is not in the whole of his Orthographic the slightest 
trace of evidence that Welsh, and not English, was Hart's 
mother-tongue. 

But, fortunately, the newly discovered Methode allows 
us to go still further and say with absolute certainty that 
Hart was no Welshman, and that he did pronounce [w] 
before [u]. With regard to the first point, he says him- 
self, in the preface, "I vse hereafter no marke for the 1, 
asspired, Which yet should be very meete for any man 
that would write the Welsh; As by the way of pastime, 
I haue done from a Welshmans mouth, though I vnder- 
stood no worde thereof, and did reade it againe to him, 
and diuers others of that language, so as one amongst 
them (which knew me not) sayde vnto the rest in Welsh, 
that I coulde speake Welsh so well as he. But the rest 
knowing the contrary, laughing tolde me what he sayde, 

1 As a matter of fact, Hart has [uld] with short u much more 
frequently than the form with long u indicated by Ellis. 



Standard of Pronunciation. 7 

whom I forthwith certified, that I did it, by an order and 
certaine knowledge what I did write, and not by any 
acquaintance with the tongue. The like haue I done of 
the Irishe" . . . 

As for [w], Hart looks upon it as a vowel, considering 
the initial groups of weU, water, etc., as diphthongs, and 
writing, accordingly, uel, ua'ter, etc. In the same manner, 
he takes [j], the initial sound of yet, yonder, etc., to be 
identical with the vowel [i], writing ict, ionder, etc. But 
this view, which is not so very far from the truth after 
all, involves him in certain difficulties, when this u or i 
is followed by another u or i. Hart dislikes writing the 
same letter twice consecutively, so in 1569 he wrote uld 
or uld, wndring, u'ni, ifrcfi for would, ivondering, wont, 
worthy, and similarly r for ye. But he evidently felt the 
inconvenience of this notation himself, for in the next 
year he adopted the device, which is not unimpeachable, 
it is true, but still clear enough, of writing his dotted u, 
which properly stands for long [u], instead of w in these 
combinations, thus u'uman, irurk, u'urfip for woman, work, 
worship. It is worthy of note, that in the very last line 
of his previous book (not counting the Index) he had 
already hit upon this expedient, writing world for world. 
There can, therefore, be not doubt, I think, that Hart 
really did pronounce the w in all these words. 

Standard of Pronunciation. 

To the charge that Hart's pronunciation may have 
been provincial and represented Chester habits of speech 
rather than "standard" English, I may first quote a letter 
from Sir James Balfour Paul, who is at present "Lyon 
King of Arms" or chief herald of Scotland. In answer 



8 Standard of Pronunciation. 

to my inquiries he was kind enough to write as follows: 
"Very little is known about the personality of John Hart, 
but it is extremely unlikely that he was a Chester man. 
The Office of Chester Herald is a very old one, having 
been first instituted before 1415. He was a Herald of 
the King and in the very early days of the office may 
possibly have been a Chester man, but by the time of 
John Hart it was merely, a heraldic title without any 
reference to the natal origin of the holder. Indeed from 
that point of view it would be as correct to say that Hart 
was a Newhaven man because he bore the title of New- 
haven Pursuivant before he was created Chester Herald. 
—No doubt Chester's office would be in London. As 
to his social position that is more difficult to pronounce 
an opinion on. Most of the heralds in the 16 th century 
were at all events persons of education and many of them 
professional men, barristers and the like. Very much 
indeed as they are now. There is no reason to suppose 
that Hart would not be in perfectly good Society: no 
illiterate person would be appointed to a place from which 
he might be called at any time to go on an embassy to 
foreign courts .... There is still a Chester Herald." 

Though Hart himself speaks very modestly of his 
own studies 1 , yet he is so far from being "illiterate" that 
he quotes several Latin authors, chiefly Quinctilian and 
other writers on orthography; he knows something about 
Greek and Hebrew and is fairly familiar with the French, 
Italian, Spanish, and German languages. He has also 
noted the different ways of pronouncing Latin in these 
several countries. He says: "iu me" si* bei diz litl treatiz 

1 And of his own style, which certainly is not always particu- 
larly clear. 



Standard of Pronunciation. 9 

ei ha'v bin a traveler bi-iond de seas, emong vulgar tungs, 
ov hurt/, dat smaul kno-ledj ei ha*v, haj) bin de kauz ov 
dis mein enterpreiz" (p. 57 a ); he mentions Meigret's book 
on French spelling (1545) as having specially influenced 
him. 

With regard to what he considered the best pronun- 
ciation we have two interesting remarks, one in O and 
the other in M. In the first, he endorses Quinctilian's 
views and says: "huens /aul dat blesing kum, dat triu 
and gu"d Jungs /aul ple"z mani? de veises huit/ me" bi 
iuzd ov de multitiud, /aul bi no kustum, but in spe'king, 
ui kno de unexpert vulgar du spe - k riudlei. derfcrr ei uil 
kaul kustum ov spi't/, de konsent ov de lerned, az ov 
living de konsent ov gud men" (p. 55 a ). And in the pre- 
face of M: "the accustomed name of eche thing is written 
therevnder [under the images in his book], as the} r are 
called in the Court, aud Lowdon speac[h]es, where the 
generall flower of all English countrie speaches, are chosen 
and vsed. And though some would say it were not so, 
reason would we should graunt no lesse: for that vnto 
these two places, do dayly resort from all townes and 
Countries, of the best of all professions, aswel of the own 
landsmen, as of aliens and straungers, and therfore they 
haue the best meanes to take the best and leaue the 
worst." 

There seems to be no reason why we should reject 
Hart's evidence beforehand and say that he did not know 
what he professes to know, the pronunciation used in the 
middle of the sixteenth century by the "best Society" of 
London. In order to form a judgment of the value of 
his evidence, our next question must be: Was Hart a 
capable observer of pronunciation, and was he competent 



10 Hart's Phonetic Equipment. 

to give a fairly reliable representation of the spoken 
language of his time? 



Hart's Phonetic Equipment. 

I have elsewhere 1 called Hart the first phonetician 
of the modern period, and this title of honour is justified 
by his fairly accurate descriptions of the organic positions 
required for consonants as well as for vowels, descriptions 
which are as a rule superior to those found in most works 
on speech sounds written even two centuries after Hart's 
death, though, of course, rather defective if judged by 
twentieth century standards. He sees clearly the difference 
between what we call voiceless and voiced consonants, 
saying that "seauen of them haue as many felowes or 
sisters, and may be so called, for that they are shaped in 
the mouth in one selfe maner and fashion: differing only 
by leauing of the inward sound 2 & vse but of the breath." 
He correctly sees that the voiced sound corresponding to 
English sh is the sound written j or g in French, which 
at that time did not exist as a separate sound in English, 
as such words as pleasure, treasure, ended still in [ziur] 
or [zjur]. 

He sees the difference between stopped and open 
consonants (see the expressions in the passage quoted 
below, p. 22). His description of the place where the 
principal configuration for each consonant takes place is 



1 Fonetik, Copenhagen 1897, p. 17; Zur geschichte cler phonetik, 
in Die neueren sprachen XIII, 211. 

2 This is Hart's constant expression for 'voice'; in one passage 
he uses the fuller expression: c the dull, dumb, inward or groning 
sounde of the brest'. 



Syllabic consonants. 11 

on the whole perfectly correct. He defines vowels as 
"simple soundes or voyces, proceeding from the brest, 
without any maner of touching of the tongue to the palet 
or foreteeth, or of the lippes close ioyning togither: or 
eyther of the lippes to their counter teeth" and he clearly 
distinguishes between back vowels, a, o, u, and front 
vowels, e, i— without, of course, using these names which 
were first invented by Alexander Melville Bell. He knows 
what a diphthong is (though in one case, which will be 
discussed below, he is not above the suspicion of having 
confounded the simple sound of French u with a diph- 
thong) and his notions of vowel-length are unusually 
sound for his age, as he keeps quality and quantity 
neatly distinct; see also below about vowel-length in 
diphthongs. 

Syllabic consonants. 

Hart recognizes syllables without vowels, though he 
looks upon them as half-syllables only. As for syllabic I 
and n, see the lists in § 45 and 46. While he had no 
new letter for n in this position, he devised one for syl- 
labic 7, an I with a loop to the left. He gives as examples 
the sentence, "the bedle is hable to fable," and speaks 
of this I as "the 1, aspired lyke to the Spanish e and 
Walsh often vse of the 11." Ellis infers from this passage 
(EEP. Ill, p. 802) that Hart probably pronounced able 
with a voiceless /, as in modern French, but this con- 
clusion is certainly wrong. No importance should be at- 
tached to Hart's use of the word c aspired\ as that won! 
is used rather loosely in other passages as well; but im- 
mediately afterwards he speaks of this English / as "dumbe 
or dull," which in his terminology invariably denotes 



12 Syllabic consonants. 

voiced sounds, see above p. 10. But his identification of 
his own sound with Spanish and Welsh 11 is certainly 
puzzling, for now, at any rate, the former is different 
from the English through being palatalized, though voiced 
like English I, while the Welsh 11 represents a voiceless 
sound. Salesbury, however, who was familiar with the 
Welsh voiceless sound, also identifies Spanish 11 with it, 
and Sir Thomas Smith says "Walli nostri & Hispani suum 
habent peculiarem sonum, quern exprimunt duplici 11, vt 
Llamar, Kullmell, qui proxime accedit ad 6\ Graecorum 
hodiernorum." Voiceless I is even now frequently heard 
as [J)l] by those who are not familiar with the sound. On 
the strength of these three observations, I venture to throw 
out the suggestion that Spanish had at that time a voice- 
less (palatalized) I in those cases in which it corresponds 
to Latin combinations of a voiceless consonant and I, as 
in llamar <C.clamare, llaga<iplaga, Mama<Cflamma, a sound 
which seems to underlie Portuguese cli as well. This 
would make Spanish 11 similar to, though not identical 
with Welsh II. However that may be, Hart in his latest 
work evidently did not maintain his former identification 
of Welsh II and his own syllabic I, though his rather 
vague expressions state, perhaps, nothing more than the 
discovery that no special letter is needed in English: 
"And for the ,1, asspired, for the which Welshmen, and 
Spanyardes do vse the ,11, For our English tongue the ,1, 
without any mark for the aspiration, may sufficiently 
serue after the folowing maner of teaching: but otherwise 
not. And therefore, I vse hereafter no marke for the 1, 
asspired, Which yet should be very meete for any man 
that would Write the Welsh." — In accordance with Hart's 
latest practice, I have in the following lists printed I 



Aspirated stops. 13 

everywhere for his looped I, as no doubt can in any case 
exist with regard to the phonetic value of the transcription. 
In (p. 22 a ) Hart speaks about syllabic r in words 
like order, border, number, render, in much the same terms 
as those used about I and n, but as a matter of fact in 
the phonetic part of that work he always writes -er, see 
§ 14, and it is not till 1570 that he frankly writes r, see 
§47. 

Aspirated stops. 

It is interesting to note that Hart anticipated the 
modern discovery of the "aspiration" of English voiceless 
stops (the breath-glide after p, t, k). He speaks of Ger- 
man pf and f in pfeiff, oepffel [sic, he means apfel or 
apfel], offen, pflaum, pfennig, and then goes on to say, 
"in huit/ u*rds ui in ingli/, ha'ving /a-pt dem uioout de 
f, or h, iet ui bre'd de h, softli and se": p-heip, ap-hel, 
p-hlum, o'p-hen and p-heni." He seems to have gathered 
from the descriptions of the ancient writers that Greek 
ph represented this "p-h" and not the sound of f. With 
regard to t(h) and Jc(h), he is not quite so explicit as in 
speaking of p(h) ; still, his meaning seems undoubtedly to 
be this, that th would correctly represent the actual sound 
of t in all cases, as it does in the usual spelling of the 
words Thames, Thomas, and Sathan and as it does in 
German theil, theur, thor and thiin [sic]. He therefore 
feels justified in retaining th in his phonetic spelling of 
some words in accordance with their etymology, though 
he is otherwise a fierce opponent of etymological spelling. 
As he expressly disapproves the use of the digraph th for 
the English sounds in thing and that, for which he devised 
separate symbols, we may feel sure that he always pro- 



14 Doublets. 

nounced a real (aspirated) t in all the words given with 
th in the list § 44. The case is similar with k(h); the 
spellings with ch, which occur in one page only (51 b ), 
are not meant to represent actual pronunciations (in that 
case, he would have written kh), but are merely ex- 
perimental orthographies to show the relation between 
Latin forms in c = k, French forms in ch =f and such 
English pairs as cart chariot, camel chamlet (camlet), candle 
chandler. 

Doublets. 

Hart's advanced standpoint is shown also in his 
definite recognition of what has been called in our times 
the "phonetics of the sentence." He sometimes w T rites 
long and sometimes short i in the words me, he, she, we, 
he, the short vowel being evidently meant for those cases 
in which the words w T ere weakly stressed in the sentence. 
While the same duality is still found in these words, 
only one form survives in the word have, where Hart 
makes a similar distinction; Hart's long-vowel form ha'v 
is, however, still preserved in modern hehave and in the 
vulgar (h)aint, when that stands for have not. Cf. also 
remark on there, etc., § 14. 

Voice assimilations. 

Hart expressly recognizes a double pronunciation in 
the case of final s and s, and his words are interesting 
enough to be quoted in full: "and furder ei feind de s, 
iuzd in is, as, his, dis, and sut/ leik oftn, and dat akor- 
ding tu de spi't/, hurt/ iet huen de folu'ing irrd beginej) 
uid s, d'order ov de tung du|) t/aundj intu s, 5us: is uel, 
as ani, his o'n, dis ue', but de foluing u"rd begining uid 



Voice assimilations. 15 



s, or /, dus, is scd, as swn, his se'ing, Sis salt, and as fi', 
is fa'mfast, his fert, dis fo'r. hier iz tu bi noted dat de 
first ov d'uder breded tu - pe'r of konsonants, tu-uit v, and 
d, me- oftn bi-in leik rnaner t/andjd in sprt/ fro deT 
inuard sound tu der bre'dd feluz, & kontrariueiz de-uTds 
ending uid bre'dd konsonants in sum pla"s, me' (uidout 
ani-ofens tu dVr) ta'k de sound ov der afein beginning 
de next u - rd: or de later ov 9e first urd bi t/andjed from 
sound tu brej), huen her souded afein beginej) de folui'ng 
urd. and de leik me hapn betuixt de fouT uder pe*rz, 
tu uit b, and p: g, and k: dg, and tf: d, and t, and gi'v 
de beter sound: hint/ duj) beautifi everi langadj. it me' 
bi aulso, dat ani on ov de sounded [?'. c. voiced] ov de 
se'vn pe'rz, komonlei in o*n u'rd, at d'end der-of, me* le'v 
de sound and bi obedient tu de bre|) ov ani o'li ov de 
se'vn bre'dd as for ha'v ta'kn: teim me* feind it gud tu 
se- ha'f ta'kn: for feind faut, to se* feint faut: and sut/ 
leik: iet until ui spe*k so, ei kno no man uil ureit so. 
but dis iz tu bi noted dat ani ov de bredd ov de se'vn 
pe'rz, most komonlei at d'end ov de former irrd, hueT 
de folu'ing begine|> uid o'n voel or mor, iz t/andjed intu 
her afein sounded, and dat bei d'afinite-it haj) uhp de voel, 
huit/ ei ha'v mut/ observed az rezon uaz" (p. 60 b , 61 a ). 

If I am not mistaken, this is the earliest mention by 
any European phonetician of that particular form of 
"sandhi" which consists in a final consonant being assi- 
milated to the initial sound of the following word with 
regard to voice or voicelessness. But Hart evidently gives 
too narrow a rule, when he says that the [z] of is, as, 
his, this, etc. was changed into [s] only before [s] and [/] ; 
the change took place before other voiceless consonants 
as well, and also before a pause. Hart's own practice in 



16 Voice assimilations. 

O is not quite consistent, and probably he did not dis- 
cover the double pronunciation till most of the book had 
been written; some instances of final -s are probably due 
to the printer. But in M he succeeded in being more 
consistent, and a glance at the figures given in § 42 and 
§ 43 under the words concerned will show that the 
wording of the rule I have given above is correct for 
Hart's own pronunciation; it is also what might be ex- 
pected from the nature of the sounds and from what is 
found in those languages that present the same peculi- 
arity in their actual pronunciation (see, for instance, my 
Lehrbuch der PJwnetik, 1904, § 176).— As for final -s in 
inflected forms, we find sometimes [s] and sometimes [z] 
in Hart's transcriptions, see the lists in § 42 and §43; in 
a few cases we may notice a tendency to regulate the 
sound according to the following sound (see the tran- 
scriptions of enemies and inventors). Perhaps the con- 
clusion is not unwarranted that in all those cases in 
which modern English knows only final [z], Hart had a 
double pronunciation, voiced before a voiced sound, and 
voiceless elsewhere. This would be true of a few other 
cases, where present English has only the voiceless sound, 
e. g. this, purpose, and adjectives in -ous. In all these 
cases, the voicing of s took place in accordance with 
"Verner's law in English" as shown by me in Studier 
over Engelshe Kasus, 1891, p. 178 ff. 

The relation between the two forms of the preposition 
of, namely [of, ov], was evidently the same, though in O 
we find in a good many instances ov, where the sandhi- 
rule would make us expect of (ov sprt/; ov kurtezi, etc.) 
But in M we find of only before voiceless consonants 
(twice), while ov occurs before voiced consonants (16 times), 



Other double forms. 17 

and vowels (5 times), also before h (twice). Final of in 
hereof, thereof, and whereof is invariably written with -f. 
If is generally spelled if, but occurs twice in the form iv 
before a vowel (iv ani, iv iu). 

Another parallel case is with) both pronunciations 
are found, but not always used consistently according to 
the sandhi-rule. As a clear instance I shall mention from 
p. 50 b : [the Latins] ura't do'z wrds uid b, doh de gri'Jcs 
ara't dem nip ph. — Hart's words about the assimilation 
in have taken, find fault I take to mean that in such cases 
there was only a tendency to change the final sound which 
was not universally carried out in actual pronunciation. 

Other double forms. 

Nor do Hart's observations of sentence-doublets end 
here; after some remarks on the slurring of vowels (see 
below) he goes on: "der iz aulso-a diskresion in ureting 1 
betuixt a, mei, dei, fro, and no: and an, mein, dein, from 
and non. a, iz fitlei-uritn huen de-u'rd folu'ing beginej) 
uid a konsonant, but uid voel or diphthong de [m, or] 2 
n, ste - i|) de gaping ov de tu - voels huit/ els /uid kum 
tugeder: de leik ov de rest: and no'n iz aulso-insti'd ov 
ne-o'n or not on. so for tu-and til, huen de presi'ding 
urd /aul end uid d, or t, un, duj) kum fitli betuixt de t, 
ov tu or til, and de former d, or t, tu seperat an over- 
mutf sound ov brewing ov dem: so dat send untu-vs, and 
hi sent untu-iu, iz beter se'd and so uritn, den send tu-us, 
or hi sent tu-iu, for so spo'kn de - muht giv okazion tu 
de he'rer t'under-stand, send us, and hi sent iu. in trait/ 



1 Evidently a misprint for ureiting. 

2 The bracketed words added by Hart in his list of "Faultes 
escaped in part of the Copies of this first impression." 

Jespersen, John Hart's Pronunciation. 2 



18 Other double forms. 

and uder sut/ leik de diskresion ov de-ureiter uil-bi-iuzd." 
Hart is obviously wrong in applying the rule for a, an, 
etc. to fro and from (in his own texts from is the only 
form used, before consonants as well as vowels), and the 
rule for un in unto and until cannot be paralleled with 
the other rules — indeed, Hart's own words about 'dis- 
kresion' show that he sees the difference— still Hart's 
words deserve notice, because it was not common even 
for grammarians in those times to pay any regard to such 
things. It would, perhaps, be worth while to examine 
whether Hart's rule for unto and until was observed in 
contemporary authors; I have counted the instances of 
the preposition to (not to before an infinitive) and of vnto 
in a few pages of the Authorized Version of 1611, and 
have found the following figures, which to some extent 
corroborate Hart's view: 

to after d or t . . . . 1 

to elsewhere 12 

vnto after d or t . . . 32 
vnto elsewhere .... 26. 

And, an. 

There is an even more striking instance of Hart's 
rare power of observation. While in and is always 
written and, in M he gives two forms. In the beginning 
of the book a great many colloquial sentences are given, 
and there the word invariably occurs in the familiar form 
an; but in the devotional and biblical pieces forming the 
latter part of the Methode, the word is always spelled 
and. Thus even differences of pronunciation due to style 
did not escape Hart's notice, and he wanted to express 
them, too, in his reformed spelling. 



Hart's System compared with Bullokar's and Gill's. 19 

Hart's System compared with Bullokar's 
and Gill's. 

If these instances of accurate observation dispose us 
to put confidence in Hart's work, so does his system of 
reformed spelling. It is as simple and neat as such a 
system can be, and though we may regret that it does 
not indicate more subtle shades of sounds — he has only 
five vowel and 21 consonant symbols — we must admire 
the consistent use he made of those symbols and the truly 
scientific spirit in which he devised and carried out his 
transcription. The system is purely phonetic, which is 
more than we can say of any other system of that period. 
Hart did not want to indicate anything but the pronun- 
ciation of his own time. He is in that respect very un- 
like that muddle-headed spelling-reformer Bullokar, who 
devised different signs by which to write the ending -s 
or -z according to its several grammatical functions, but 
used the same signs for the voiced as for the voiceless 
ending; who did not keep u and v apart 1 ; who employed 
a good many mute letters; who used his sign for syllabic 
consonants in many cases where no new syllable is pro- 
duced; whose system is nothing but the traditional spelling 
with a host of mystical and inconsistently employed dots 
and accents over and under the letters, — and is in short 
"confusion worse confounded." 

Gill's system is, of course, infinitely superior to Bul- 
lokar's; but this again is not purely phonetic. He admits 
four 'rules' "qua3 regular huius asperitatem [that is, a 



1 Bullokar expressly objects to Maister Chester's (i.e. Hurt's) 
view that f and v are a c paire'. 



2* 



20 Hart's System compared with Bullokar's and Gill's. 

strictly phonetic spelling] aliquantulum lenire, Ortho- 
graphiam permultum adiuuare possunt. 1. Deriuatio, 
2. Differentia, 3. Mos receptus, & 4. Dialectus." 

According to the first, Gill writes the vowels in many, 
perhaps most, unstressed syllables with more regard to 
etymology than to sound. As this very important para- 
graph (Jiriczeks ed. of Gill, p. 14, 1. 23—34) seems to 
have been generally misunderstood, I subjoin a free para- 
phrase of it to show what to me is its obvious meaning: 
"Etymology should never make us write letters which are 
not actually heard and which neither can nor ought to 
be heard; thus I object strongly to writing houer, honor, 
honest instead of ouer, onor, onest, because we say an ouer, 
not a houer, etc. But whenever the sound is indistinct 
or wavering, we should follow etymology, thus writing 
divjn, sholar in preference to devjn, sJcoler [which in them- 
selves would indicate Gill's pronunciation equally well or 
even better]; it is better to write persons than yersns, 
because in personal, personaliti the vowel o has not yet 
disappeared [accordingly, it was no longer heard in per- 
sons and was probably vanishing in the other words]. 
Thus educated people who have learnt etymology, should 
write divjn, slcolar, onor, hungurer; but I have no objection 
to unlearned people following their ears and writing 
devjn, skoler, oner, Jeungerer." In the whole of this para- 
graph Gill makes no allusion at all to any difference in 
pronunciation between educated and uneducated people; 
his own unaccented vowels, then, were just as in distinct 
as those of the "indoctus." This has been overlooked by 
all modern writers on these subjects. — Where Gill did not 
know the etymology, he wrote like the 'indoctus', thus 
venter = 'venture'. 



Hart's System compared with Bullokar's and Gill's. 21 

Gill's second principle makes him distinguish in his 
spelling, not only between our c noster' and ouer c hora' 
where a distinction may be made in pronunciation (id enim 
& prolatio ferre potest), but also between,; c ego', ei c oculus\ 
and ei c ita\ where he expressly says that there was a 
difference only in the meaning (solo sensu), and not in 
the sound. — The third principle, consuetudo, makes Gill 
write folk, fait, balm, half, talk, ivalk with I though it was 
in his pronunciation usually mute, further with, oder, of, 
against in preference to wi&, uder, ov, agenst, although 
the rejected spellings would according to him represent 
the ordinary pronunciation, while the preferred spellings 
indicate nothing more than what some educated or learned 
people pronounce sometimes, especially when reading 
(docti aliqui viri sic legunt, & aliquando loquuntur). 
Custom also makes Gill write qu- rather than lew- and 
retain the ordinary spelling of proper names. — Finally 
"dialectus" makes Gill tolerant of differences in spelling, 
especially in poetry. This fourth principle cannot, really, 
be put on an equal footing with the others. 

Now it is clear that all these qualifications of the 
phonetic principle, meant as they were to make Gill's 
proposed scheme of spelling more palatable to his con- 
temporaries, must very seriously impair the value of his 
work for our purposes. Gill does not give, and does not 
pretend to give, a faithful representation of his own or 
anybody else's actual pronunciation, still less is his spel- 
ling meant to show or to teach any particular pronun- 
ciation: it is simply a reformed spelling with a leaning 
towards phoneticism. If we want to know the pronun- 
ciation of any given word in the early seventeenth cen- 
tury, it is not sufficient to look up Gill's representation 



22 Hart's System compared with Bullokar's and Gill's. 

of that word, but we must in every case put the question, 
Has not etymology, or the desire of differentiation, or 
simply conservatism made him deviate from the natural 
pronunciation in favour either of a pedantic or even of a 
non-existing pronunciation? 

Hart's spelling, on the other hand, is based on no 
other principle but actual pronunciation, rendered with 
the utmost fidelity he was capable of, and with express 
rejection of such considerations as etymology. He even 
goes so far as to say (p. 62 a ): "de skoti/ spi't/ iz tuil-iu, 
for our huat uil-iu, huei me - de' not boldlei ureit it so?" 
Hart is on his guard against "spelling-pronunciations" as 
in his remark (ibid.) "az diz u'rd Jcomaundment, der iz 
no*n but spelerz du se' Jcomaundement hurt/ iz de fren/" 
sound, and ureiting." He does not admit capital letters 
in his spelling, being thus more consistently phonetic than 
some phoneticians of the twentieth century, and, what is 
even more remarkable, in his index he does not follow 
the time-honoured arrangement of the alphabet, but takes 
first the vowels a, e, i, o, u, then "de foirr pe'rz huit/ ar 
ma-d uid a stoping brej) : tu ui't b, p : d, t : g, It: and dg, 
tf [which were considered as single sounds and represented 
by single letters], den d'uder £rr £rulei bre'dd pe*rs, tu 
ui't d, p-.v, f: and 2, s. den de 5 semiuoka'ls I, m, n, r, 
and L [his sign for syllabic 7, see above], and de tu* 
bre'ds / and h." Thus, to the very end of his book, 
Hart— if I may coin a useful word — is the least spelling- 
bound of all the old phoneticians, grammarians, and 
spelling-reformers. 



Hart's Practice. 23 

Hart's Practice. 

If Hart's principles, then, are excellent, the next 
question must be, How did he carry thern out in his 
practice? Are the transcriptions we actually find in his 
books, as reliable as his theories would lead us to expect? 
And here it must be said at once that it would have 
been better if the printer and proof-reader had been much 
more careful. There is no doubt that many words are 
not spelt exactly according to pronunciation, whether the 
fault in any particular case be Hart's own or the printer's. 
No one who has practised writing and printing phonetic 
texts will be too severe on that point. The dots under 
letters to denote vowel-length are especially liable to drop 
off or to be forgotten. In most cases it is possible by 
means of such statistics as are given in the lists below 
to determine Hart's pronunciation with tolerable exact- 
ness. But with regard to many words found in two or 
more forms, it would certainly be rash to consider only 
one as correct and look upon the others merely as mis- 
prints. Indeed, the greater familiarity acquired through 
my protracted occupation with Hart has taught me much 
greater circumspection in rejecting any form in his books 
as erroneous than I had to begin with, and I have now 
left out of my lists many of the signs by which I had 
at first denoted forms as due to influence from the ordi- 
nary spelling or to the omission of a dot. Some of these 
will be discussed below; here I shall only mention that 
the three forms of father (fader, fa'dr, fadr), the two forms 
of the ending -al (-al, -aul) and of -ly (li, -lei) are all of 
them correct, as shown conclusively by the notations of 
other old phoneticians and by other considerations. 



24 The Sounds in Detail. 

The Sounds in Detail. 

It will be impossible here to deal with all the 
questions that Hart's transcriptions might give rise to; 
that would, indeed, amount to a discussion of most 
problems in the history of modern English sounds. I 
shall confine myself to the most important or most debat- 
able points, reserving the treatment of other points for my 
forthcoming Modem English Grammar (Vol. I, Sounds 
and Spellings). To the student the most fruitful source 
of information is the phonetically written part of Hart's 
books; all the words therein contained will be found in 
the complete word-lists given below. But in the following 
pages I shall also give such information as may be 
derived from the non-phonetic parts. 

Consonants. 

There is very little that calls for remark in the con- 
sonant system, which has, on the whole, remained un- 
changed to a higher degree than the vowels. 

Hart gives as examples of mute consonants the fol- 
lowing words, most of which do not occur in his reformed 
spelling: b in doubt, c and h in aucthoritie, I in souldiour, 
s in baptisme, p in corps, condempned. 

He considers dg and // as simple sounds, denoting 
them by means of a letter closely resembling our i and 
a C with a loop to it. For practical reasons I have every- 
where substituted dg and if for these two symbols. The 
sounds are identified by Hart with Italian gi and with 
Italian c before e and i, Spanish ch. 

Hart retains the sound of t in the combinations -stl- 
and -fin, writing kastl, epistl, oftn, but not in -nch, writing 
frenf, not frentf. 



Consonants. 25 

Hart's works give us no means of ascertaining whether 
his ng stands always for [n,g], which to me is very pro- 
bable, or sometimes for [qg] and sometimes for [nj as in 
modern pronunciation. 

With regard to I, the old form faut with the French 
dropping of I occurs twice and probably was the only 
form used by Hart; for faults, which is found once, ob- 
viously is nothing but the ordinary spelling retained, so 
that a conclusion as to Hart's pronunciation can no more 
be drawn from the I than from the final z. Cf. also his 
Jcauderon for 'cauldron'. For 'realm' he has rem, which 
agrees with the pun in Ben Jonson's Euery Man in his 
Humour V. 1 (1. 2829 in Bang's ed. of the Folio) "Bodie 
o' me, he carries a whole realme, a common-wealth of 
paper, in's hose!" On the other hand, there is no trace 
in Hart of the English disappearance of I; he writes tfalk 
and half. The three-syllable form eidllei with syllabic I 
in the middle syllable deserves notice. 

Jc in hi- and w in wr- were still pronounced everywhere. 

Hart says that many in reading Latin pronounce d 
and t in certain words as d and p (p. 38 a ), and in a later 
passage (p. 51 a ) after stating that the sounds [d, £] were 
found in Latin no more than in Italian, French, or Spanish, 
he says: "iet our predesesors abiuzd de d, in ad, and aul 
de kompounds derof in de sound ov d, eksept 0' u*rd 
huer-uid it iz kompounded began uid d, az dico, and duco, 
in sut/ de folomg d, did konstre'n dem tu sound de 
former riht. and mo*r ha*v ui abiuzd de t, in de sound 
ov |), in de fiird persons singuler ov aul verbs aktivz and 
neuters ending in t, uid a voel befoT it: and for d, in aj»«l, 
de t, in caput, &c." This may account for Hart's own 
advertized, if it is not simply a misprint, cf. aduertizment. 



26 Vowels. 

Vowels. 

The old-spelling examples which Hart gives of the 
five vowels written in the manner he recognizes, are first 
the sentence, "The pratling Hosteler hath dressed curried 
and rubbed our horses well," and then the following 
words, 

a: haue Adam, 

e: set the net, 

i: bring this in, 

o: no not so, 

u: cum vp cut. 

The vowels with the value that he wanted to give to 
them throughout are according to him all contained in 
the one Italian word riputatione, and in the German sen- 
tence, "Im anfang was das wort, vnd das wort icas bey 
Gott vnd Gott ivas das selbig wort". This gives us a 
general clue to the sounds attributed by Hart to his 
vowel letters, though it leaves us in doubt with regard 
to such details as the exact quality for instance of i and 
u: were they narrow as in the Italian, or wide as in the 
German words? 

i. 

See lists § 1 — 5. 

Long [r] generally corresponds to Middle English 
long close e, in the received spelling written e, ee, ie. 
But there are some words in which Hart has this sound 
although the received spelling has ea, which generally 
means the more open sound, Hart's [e'j. Among these, 
strrh and ui'ri can hardly be called exceptions, since it 
is really the spelling ea that is irregular (ME. streke, 
strike, OE. strica; OE. iverig). The close pronunciation 
of the verb to read seems to have been common; the 



Vowels. 27 

spellings reed, rcede, rede were pretty frequent in those 
days, and rede is still used sometimes in the archaic 
signification c advise'; cf. also Scotch reid. Shakespeare 
rimes this read with indeed (Vietor, A Shakespeare Phono- 
logy, p. 16), and in Fletcher's The Faithful Shepherdess, 
in the rimes of which the two sounds are kept scrupul- 
ously apart, the present tense read is found riming with 
speed. The explanation probably is that a new present 
stem was formed analogically from the past tense and 
participle re(a)d, cf. feed : fed, speed : sped, etc. Cf. the 
Shakespearian sheed, see Vietor, 1. c. 17. — Tdi'n for clean 
might be the old Kentish form. I can offer no quite 
satisfactory explanation of Hart's in sti'd ov for instead of 
(Butler, Hudibr. p. 139, rimes in their stead : need). 

The occurrence of the lengthened form of short OE. 
i in gi(')v, li(')v, uiC)t is interesting; cf. the same pheno- 
menon with u, below. 

Some instances of long [r] must be discussed in con- 
nection with what Hart says about the English pronun- 
ciation of Latin. On p. 31 a and again 34 a he says that 
"we our selues doe rightly sound all fiue vowels in the 
Gospell [St. John] in Latine, In principio erat verbum, etc. 
vnto sine: where i, is sounded the Diphthong ei, or Greek 
ei, & in qui, as though it were written quei, whereas in quis 
and quid it is rightly sounded." He gives as further in- 
stances of the right pronunciation of i, that is, as [i] or 
[r], nobis, tux, siti, vobis, tuis, mis, Me, ipse, iste, hie, is, 
and the ending of the dative and ablative plural, while 
[ei] is used in the vocative mi, in mei, tibi, sibi, in the 
second syllable of illius, Mi, ipsius, ipsi, istius, isti, in the 
nominative plural; "in mihi, many of late days do sound 
the i, right in both sillables, euen as i, in nobis'; "in 



28 Vowels. 

vita, vitam, viri, and qui some sounde it also in ei." With 
regard to the expression "of late days" it may, perhaps, 
be remarked that it is more probable that [r] was the old 
pronunciation and that [ei] had only just come in in the 
sixteenth century as a consequence of the diphthongizing 
of English long i. Further, Hart says on p. 47 b imme- 
diately after the "title" of the first chapter given in his new 
spelling: "In dis trtl abuv-uritn, ei konsider ov de r, in 
exersrz, & ov de u, in instruments: de leik ov de i", in 
ti'tl, hint/ de komon man, and mani lernd, du- sound in 
de diph^ongs ei, and iu: iet ei uld not J>ink it mrt to 
ureit dem, in do"z and leik u'rds; hueT de sound ov 3e 
voel o-nli, me- bi as uel aloued in our sprt/, as dat ov 
de diph|)ong iuzd ov de riud: and so far ei alou obser- 
vasion for derivasions." This evidently means, that in 
these words both pronunciations were in actual use, though 
[r] and [u] were rarer, and that Hart here preferred the 
latter pronunciations as being in harmony with the Latin 
words from which they were derived, if Latin were pro- 
nounced in the (correct) manner he advocated. This will 
account for Hart's [i] in aspi'r, deri'v, and devrz; rcsitep 
is in any case a misprint, whether we take it as standing 
for resi'tep or for reseitep; the latter would agree with seit 
'cite'. All these are Latin words, and when we find M'Jct 
once for 'liked', the probability is that it is misprinted 
for leikt; the adjective and adverb 'like' is frequently 
spelled leik. 

e. 

See lists § 10—14. 

Long [e-] regularly represents ME. open e\ in the ordi- 
nary spelling often written ea. 



Vowels. 29 

Hart's [e-] in words like day will be discussed sepa- 
rately, see diphthongs. 

For (n)either, he has the forms (n)eder and (n)e'der 
(besides noder, which corresponds to ME. nouther). These 
forms are interesting; Victor (1. c. 39 f.) mentions the 
rimes neither : together and neither : whether in two (doubt- 
ful) Shakespearian poems and says that the form with 
long [e - ] — the source of modern [i - ] — is first recorded 
by Cooper (1685), and that the form with short [e] is not 
mentioned till Lediard (1725). Here, then, we have a 
further instance of the useful information obtained through 
Hart's book. 1 

ME. shortened [e] is found in the comparative greter 
(cf. mod. latter, utter); nerer for mod. nearer probably 
belongs to the same class. 

In unstressed syllables both be- and bi-, de- and di- 
are found (but only re-). A more important fact is the 
retention in final syllables of original -e in some words 
from the French, namely in afinite, Jcomodite (also -ti), 
dislomodite, kuriozite. The medial e in verclei 'verily' is 
an original ai, cf. below. 

The forms emong and emongst (only once amongst) 
are not peculiar to Hart, but are found rather frequently 
in the fourteenth and following centuries, see NED. 

It is not easy to ascertain the exact value of e in 
weak syllables; in many cases it has developed into mod. 
[i], as in the endings -ed, -es; in other cases we have 
now [i] by the side of [a], as in -ment; but in most cases 
we have [a] alone, especially before (written) r. That the 
vowel must already have approached the modern mixed 

1 Butler, too, rimes whether : neither and either, together : either 
(Hudibr. p. 25, 123, 254.) 



30 Vowels. 

vowel, may be, perhaps, inferred from the insertion of a 
parasitic e befor r, as in piuer, 'pure', siu'er (also siur) 
'sure', feier 'fire 5 , meter 'mire', o'er 'oar'; perhaps also in 
e'er (= 'e're' for ever?) and in beier, the meaning of which 
is doubtful, as 'buyer' does not give very good sense: it 
occurs in the sentence, 'this bier is higher of power, than 
the dier by his fire\ which is given as furnishing examples 
of three vowels coming together and forming two syl- 
lables. See also dier 'dear' and lixer 'here' in the list 
§ 7 (and 6). With these words may be compared the 
following, in which the e formed etymologically a sepa- 
rate syllable, viuer Viewer', deier 'dyer', heier 'higher', 
pouer or power 'power', ple'er 'player'. No parasitic e is 
found in the following, aprr, tfi'r, tfer, er 'ear', pre'r 
'prayer', mo'r, for-, befor or bifo'r, ro'r, so'r, no more 
than in the weak syllables of ftgiur, natiur, pleziur, per- 
adventiur, thre'ziur, and iur your', which goes together 
with these as being generally unstressed. 

a. 

That Hart's a, long and short, was really a back 
vowel and had not become the front vowel [se] or [e], is 
evident from his description, compared with that of the 
other vowels: a is formed "with wyde opening the mouth, 
as when a man yauneth." is formed "by taking awaye 
of all the tongue, cleane from the teeth or gummes, as 
is sayde for the a, and turning the lippes round as a 
ring . . .," and u "by holding in lyke maner the tongue 
from touching the teeth or gummes (as is said of the a, 
and o) and bringing the lippes so neare togither, as there 
be left but space that the sounde may passe forth with 
the breath." Contrast this with the description of the 



Vowels. 31 

front vowels: e is formed "with somewhat more closing 
the mouth [than for a], thrusting softlye the inner part 
of the tongue to the inner and vpper great teeth, (or 
gummes for want of teeth)," and i "by pressing the 
tongue in like maner, yet somewhat more foreward, and 
bringing the iawe somewhat more neare." 

The back quality of a is also evident from the manner 
in which Hart identifies it with the a of other languages, 
Italian, Spanish, French and Welsh. But in his mention 
of German he says, "de-a, de* du-oftn sound bro'der den 
ui du 1 , but mut/ aulso-as ui du." This of course means 
that the Germans have two varieties of a (as indeed they 
have even now), and that the "broader" (retracted or 
lowered) variety was not found in English. This broad 
a cannot, then, have been Hart's sound in those cases 
in which Vietor supposes it to have been common in the 
sixteenth and seventeenth centuries as the predecessor of 
the [o-] of our own days. (Phon. Studien in, 92, Shakesp. 
Phon. p. 66.) 

There may, of course, have been some little qualita- 
tive difference between the long and the short a, the very 
first germ of the splitting into the two sounds of the 
present [ei] and [se], as in lame and lamb; but the differ- 
ence was probably very small, comparable to that be- 
tween the [r] of feet and the [i] of fit. 

There are some interesting vacillations in quantity, 
which could certainly be more easily tolerated when the 
qualitative difference was small than later, when "long 
and short a" had become distinct sounds; see the no- 
tations of father, change, master, also the ending -ation, 
which is regularly transcribed -asion in O and -a'sion 
in M. 



32 Vowels. 

O. 

See the lists, § 26 ff. 

Both long and short o were probably 'open', though 
it is impossible to determine their exact quality. 

The instances of o or o" for oiv will be discussed 
below; in the lists they are marked with a star. 

The lengthening bo'r' in the apostrophized from of 
borrow is peculiar; I am not able to parallel it from other 
sources. 

The shortened holli for holy (OE. halig) is to be com- 
pared with the received sorry (OE. sarig), with ready (OE. 
rmdig) and other shortenings due to the inflected forms, 
in which the consonant group in [-rja, -djo] reacted on 
the preceding vowel. Besides, compounds like holiday and 
holibut (generally written halibut) with their regularly short- 
ened vowel may have influenced the simple word. 

There are some traces of the development which 
ultimately led to the modern [wa] in one, once, though 
they are not found in these words, which are still 
o'n, o'ns, but in only, written uonli in M (but o(')nli in 
O), and in huolei, in both of which Standard English 
has given up the [w] -sound though it is still retained in 
the spelling wholly. 

u. 

See the lists, § 34 ff. 

No mention is found of the tendency to unround 
this vowel which has led to the modern [a.] in cut, etc. 

OE. short u is lengthened in lu'v love', and in abu'v 
'above', which is also found with short u. The shortening 
of long u = OE. 6, which is so common later, is found 
in mother and other, which now have [a], and in booh, took, 



Diphthongs. 33 

and good, which now have [u] ; in all of these words the 
long u' is, however, also recorded by Hart; cf. also his 
forms for done and doth. 

In instrument the ordinary pronunciation had iu, and 
Hart only writes u because this pronunciation, evidently 
the rarer one, agreed with the derivation of the word, 
see the passage quoted sub i: "While he writes likewise 
argument, institusions , uniform, uniformlei, universalis 
Tcuriuz, Jcuriozite, we are probably right when we take iu 
to be a more common pronunciation than his u; cf. also the 
two transcriptions of crucify and tutor. 

For u alternating with ou, see this diphthong. 

Diphthongs, 
e* = ay, ey and o = ow. 

This will be the proper place to deal with Hart's e" 
in words like day, may, play, chain, faith, obey, etc., in 
which twentieth century English has regularly the diph- 
thong [ei] or rather [ei]. The words concerned will be 
easily found in the list § 10, w r here I have marked them 
with a star. In the rest of the words, Hart's e - regularly 
corresponds to ME. open e*, which has become Present Eng- 
lish [r, ij] as in deal, each, ease, if it has not been shortened 
as in breath, death. Now, as the sounds in the two 
groups of words were kept apart in ME. and are also 
distinct in Present English, it is unthinkable that they 
should have been identical in an intermediate period. 
If such words as sea and say, seal and sail, veal and veil 
had coalesced, how could they have been again separated 
and distributed into two sounds in a manner that exactly 
corresponded to the original distribution? This would 
presuppose in ordinary English speakers of the seven- 

Jespersen, John Hart's Pronunciation. 



34 Diphthongs. 

teenth century a knowledge of Middle English sound- 
history which would be little short of miraculous. 

This consideration leaves us only two possible ex- 
planations: either Hart represented a dialect confounding 
the two sounds, a dialect which was nowhere else men- 
tioned and which died out rapidly without leaving any 
traces, or else his notation was deficient. Of these two 
alternatives the second is undoubtedly the more probable. 
Hart had only five vowel symbols; and most likely there 
was no period of the language in which this would have 
been a sufficient number to render all the vowels really 
used as distinct sounds in English. How, then, did Hart 
pronounce his "e"" in day? 

The solution is to be found, I believe, in Hart's 
theory of diphthongs. More clearly than other phone- 
ticians he saw that quantity in diphthongs is not quite 
so simple a matter as one might imagine. In O he expressly 
distinguishes between two classes of diphthongs, one con- 
sisting of two short vowels and the other of one short 
and another long. As examples of the first class he gives 
the sentence "ui uil reid bei ionder uel, hue'r de uat uas 
uelne'r ta'kn bei de iung hound," and of the second "iir 
ueT ua - king in de fou'r|) tou*r, hue'r az de bue - did pouT 
ua'ter upon de hue't flou-r" (43 b ). It will be seen that he 
reckons as diphthongs also combinations with [j] and [w], 
and that hue'r in the first sentence is really an example 
of the second class. Hart did not in this work perceive 
the possibility of a third class, consisting of a long first 
and a short second element. But in his last work, M, he 
recognized such long-short diphthongs, writing o m i in o'ister 
'oyster' and o'u in a dozen words (see list § 32). With 
the exception of bro'uht 'brought' all these o - «<-words have 



Diphthongs. 35 

now the identical diphthong [o'u], and the [u]-elernent 
originates partly in an old w (OE. w in maivan, sawan, 
siowian, sawol; OE. g, ME. w in boga, agen), partly in the 
glide before I. 

If now we examine how Hart expressed the same 
sound in his previons work, we find a great deal of vacil- 
lation, the evident result of a deficient appreciation of the 
real nature of the diphthong. He writes ou in oun 'own', 
but generally he has o' or short o: gro', Mo', Jcno'n, fio' 
— Jcno, Jio or fo (also/m), bestoed, slopful 1 , noder ('neither'; 
OE. nawder); before I: tfarJco'l, hoi, ho'lu'rts — bold- 
lei, old. 2 In M we have one isolated instance of the 
notation Hart used in O, in the word ro' = 'row (in 
a boat)'. 

It is worthy of note that Hart hesitated with regard 
to the writing of ou before ght and that the two instances 
of ouht occur later in O (p. 67 b , 68 b ) than the two of 
oht (p. 50 b , 53 b ); brould is found on p. 58 b , but broht on 
p. 51 a , 62 b , 65 b . In M, a year later, he wrote bro'uht. 
It is possible that Hart and his contemporaries had two 
pronunciations, one with short o, which has regularly 
resulted in Present English [o-], and another with [o'u], 
which has since disappeared. 



1 This word is now pronounced [slo'ub]; ME. slouthe is formed 
directly from the adjective sloiv. Ekwall (Zur gesc/t. der stimmhoflen 
interdentalen spirans, Lund 1906, p. 25) interprets Hart's slop and 
iup as containing short vowels; hut it is better to interpret botli 
words in accordance with the naturally developed present pronun- 
ciation. 

2 We have the same vacillation in weak syllables with -ow from 
ME. -ive (-awe): boroued-felo'-moro, boro, folo, beside which we lind -« 
and -u-:felu\ fohc-felu, this u being the natural syllabication of 
w after the disappearance of the final e; in foluef, folwng, hdlued 
we have, perhaps, dissyllabic forms with u = [w]. 



36 Diphthongs. 

If now we turn to the c%-diphthong, the historical 
development of which is on the whole parallel to that of 
the diphthong in know, the conclusion seems warranted 
that here too Hart had a diphthong with a long first 
element, and that in 1569 he did not know how to deal 
with it. Consequently, just as he wrote gw for 'grow 5 , 
he used the makeshift notation de' for c day'. In 1570 he 
had corrected his conception of one of these diphthongs, 
but not yet of the other: if we had been fortunate enough 
to have a still later book from his hand, it is probable 
that we should have seen in it some such notation as 
de'i. Indeed, in two places we find a forestalling of this 
notation as early as 1569, in the forms ste'id for the 
participle 'stayed' (also ste'd) and ste'ip for the third person 
singular of the same verb, both occurring towards the 
end of 0. Both forms are evidently meant as mono- 
syllables, for Hart always writes -ed and -ep~ in the fully 
sounded verbal endings. 1 

We have further evidence of a diphthongal pronun- 
ciation in the isolated ae in aehtp c eigth' and in ai in half 
a dozen words (auluai(s), generally aulue'2, tfamberlain, 
etc., § 24). With the exception of painter (but pented) 
this ai only occurs in unstressed syllables, and there is, 
of course, a strong suspicion that it is merely the tradi- 
tional spelling that has crept in through inadvertency on 
the part of the writer or printer. If these ai's were really 
written deliberately they would seem to indicate that the 

1 In the MS. of 1551 there may be a dim anticipation of the 
correct view, when he writes: "ai or ay, & ei or ey, the powers of 
■which voels we now myx together confuzibli, making the sound of 
the same long e, and not of any parfait diphthong" though it must 
be confessed that he there seems to identify the sounds of feare, 
faire, saielh, cheyne, and theym. 



Diphthongs. 37 

first element of Hart's e'i must have been a very open 
sound, and perhaps [sei] would be the most adequate 
rendering in modern phonetic symbols. 

We know from Hart's contemporary, Sir Thomas 
Smith (1568) that the pronunciation of the diphthong in 
question was rather unsettled in those times. His utter- 
ances on this question have been made conveniently 
accessible in Ellis's great work, I p. 120 ff., but their inter- 
pretation offers some difficulty. Setting aside his mention 
of Scotch and Northern pronunciation, he mentions three 
pronunciations. 

I. His own, in which a distinction, though a very 
small one (minima differentia) is made between ei in 
feign, dainty, paint, faint, neigh, and ai in pay, day, way, 
etc. This distinction is now generally recognized as a 
purely artificial one, suggested to Smith by the spelling. 
In n and III the two diphthongs had become identical, 
as indeed they must have become long before Smith's 
time in natural Standard English. 

II. The refined pronunciation, used by those mentioned 
in various places as "mulierculse qusedam delicatiores, & 
nonnulli qui volunt isto modo videri loqui vrbanius," or 
as "qui valde delicate voces has pronuntiant, muliercula) 
praesertim," or finally as "foeminse quaedam delicatiores." 
As these expressions are nearly identical, we must sup- 
pose that the pronunciations Smith mentions in the three 
paragraphs are really the same. Now, in the first place, 
the pronunciation indicated is [ei] or [e'i], in the second, 
"explicant plane Romanam diphthongum ae," and in the 
third ei. Ellis takes the reference to Latin ae to mean 
the monophthong [e*]. Similarly ViStor takes Smith's 
words to imply that some of these "finer ladies" pronounced 



38 Diphthongs. 

ei, and others Latin ae, i. e. [e'j, which latter pronun- 
ciation ("a still thinner") he identifies with Hart's monoph- 
thong e\ But Smith says nothing about his mulierculse 
having two pronunciations differing in "thinness," and he 
expressly mentions ae as a diphthong. As he takes care 
to inform us that diphthongs are such simple things that 
"any boy from the street who has learnt his letters" will 
be able to explain them to you, he cannot have said 
"diphthong" if he meant "monophthong." In another 
passage (not quoted by Ellis) Smith speaks about the 
oi-diphthong, saying "Alij easdem voces per ce Romanam 
scribunt diphthongum: boe toe coe. Et ita pronuntiant, 
vt intelligas diphthongum esse oe." Are we to suppose 
that boy, toy, coy were then by some pronounced with a 
monophthong? Evidently the two cases are parallel, and 
the solution seems to be that in Smith's (theoretical) 
pronunciation of Latin, ae, oe were diphthongs the final 
element of which was not [i], but [e] ; ae probably to him 
meant [e(*)e], and the 'feminine' pronunciation of ay, ey 
was [e( - )i] ending in a wide or lowered i, that might even 
become [e], thus distinct in both elements from his third 
pronunciation. As regards quantity, it is true that Smith 
says "In his est vtraque litera breuis apud vrbanius pro- 
nuntiantes," but as he writes "/am 1 libens ac volens," the 
first element may have been at least half-long, even if 
the length of the whole diphthong was less than with 
rustic speakers. 

III. The rustic pronunciation. Those who pronounce 
thus are in the three passages called "alij," "rustici," and 
"Eurosaxones populares mei rusticiores." The diphthong is 



1 The diseresis with Smith indicates length. 



Diphthongs. 39 

in the first place described simply as ai, in the second he says : 
"Rustici vtranque aut extremam saltern literam longam 
sod antes, pinguem quendam odiosum, & nimis adipatuni 
sonum redduwt: pai, dai, wai, mai, lai," and in the third, 
"minis pingui & adipato sono, ivay, day, pay: vt etiam 
tinnituw illud i reddat in fine." What constitutes the 
"disagreeable fatness" of this sound, is evidently its drawl- 
ing character combined with the greater, qualitative di- 
stance between its two elements. The first part is more 
open than in number II pronunciation 1 , and the second 
part is more distinctly an [i] (narrow), which produces a 
jingling effect. The first element was long, as clearly 
shown by the symbol a. Ellis is doubtfully inclined to 
take Smith's word 'extremam' as meaning the first element, 
which is certainly very bold. It must mean the last 
element, whether this was really long, or whether its nar- 
rowness induced Smith to think it long, in the same 
manner as most English people hear a short narrow 
French, Scotch or Danish [i] as long. Possibly Smith did 
not turn his phrase very happily and meant by his 'sal- 
tern' merely what would be more logically expressed if 
he had said: "the rustics differ from refined people by 
making both elements long or at least by making the last 
one long," implying that the first element was long with 
everybody. This, however, is rather uncertain. 2 

1 Smith's a need not denote a full back [a], but may denote 
a sound like [se] in Pres. E. man (long), as he uses the same symbol 
for Scotch "ban aut bean, stan aut stean" [= bone, stone] "cuius 
sonus est intermedius inter a Romanum & e." This passage is im- 
portant for the history of the special development of Scotch a; Luick 
(Untersuchungen p. 127) seems to have known only part of it. 

2 Gill has both ai and ai (a = 'long a', probably [«•]) in many 
words {day, clay, may, way, lay, pay, maid, praise etc.), and 01 in 
others (faith, obey, paint, play, plain, etc.;. 



40 Diphthongs. 

Smith's utterances, thus interpreted, read pretty much 
like a description of the two pronunciations one may- 
hear in London any day at the beginning of the twen- 
tieth century in the very same words, day, way, etc. (and in 
those with original long a, such as paper, tale), the refined 
diphthong beginning with [e] and ending with [e] or a sound 
intermediate between [e] and [i], and the vulgar beginning 
with a much opener sound fse] or even [a] and having 
thus a much greater divergence between the starting point 
and the final sound. Only, nowadays, the two pronun- 
ciations are not distributed according to sex as they were 
in the sixteenth century if we are to believe Smith and 
Mulcaster 1 (as well as Gill's hints about 'mopseys'). Be- 
sides, the modern open diphthong seems to be a recent 
development rather than a survival of the old rusticism. 

To return to Hart. His words seem to disprove 
Luick's theory, which at first blush looks very plausible, 
that the development of ai and long a' went hand in 
hand, the first element of the diphthong becoming fronted 
when [a] became a front vowel. (Anglia XIV, p. 273 ff.), 
Harts [aj was back, his day-diphthong front. Luick over- 
looks the disagreement between his own contention that 
the fronting of a was found in the lower classes espe- 
cially, and Smith's words about the more palatal pronun- 
ciation of the diphthong being characteristic of the more 
refined speakers. 

I may bring this inquiry to a conclusion by saying 
that I am inclined to think the modern diphthongs [ei, 



1 "ai, is the mans diphthong, & eoundeth full: ei, the womans, 
and soundeth finish in the same both sense, and vse, a ivoman is 
deintie, and feinteth soon, the man fainteth not bycause he is nothing 
daintie." (Elementarie, 1582, p. 119.) 



Diphthongs. 41 

ou] in day, know, etc. are simply the unchanged repre- 
sentatives of the diphthongs of the sixteenth century. 
The generally accepted view is that the latter lost their 
diphthongic character when they became identical with 
the sounds in name, so, etc., and all these sounds together 
were again diphthongized in the nineteenth century. The 
only reason for this view that I am aware of is the fact 
that the sounds are not described as real diphthongs by 
grammarians between the period of the coalescence of a 
and ai (and of 6 and ou) and the nineteenth century. 
But this does not signify much, as all these grammarians 
had a very dull sense of hearing, and as diphthongs of 
that particular kind, with long first elements and with 
little distance in sound between the two elements 1 , are 
not easily distinguished from monophthongs. The diph- 
thongic character of these sounds was independently dis- 
covered in the nineteenth century by several writers, first 
of all, if I am not mistaken, by T. Batchelor {An Ortho- 
epical Analysis of the English Language 1809), then hy 
Thomas Wright Hill, the father of Sir Rowland Hill of 
Penny Post fame [Lecture on the Articulations of Speech, 
1821, in Selection from the Papers of T. W. H. I860) 2 , 
later by Rush (1827) and Smart (1838). And yet phone- 
ticians and grammarians went on describing the sounds 
as monophthongs and as identical with French or German 
long e's and o's. Even such an eminent phonetician as 
Ellis, though admitting the frequency of the diphthong, 



1 They may be called c slow' diphthongs in contradistinction to 
such 'fast' diphthongs as modern [ai, au] in high, hotr, in which the 
movement of the tongue is made much more rapidly. 

2 See on Batchelor and Hill my Fonetik (Copenhagen L897, 
p. 32 ff.), Die neueren sprachen XIII (1905) p. 404. 



42 Diphthongs. 

was deaf to it in his own pronunciation. I have before 
me a note I made on the 9th August 1887, when I had 
spent an interesting afternoon at his house with the Nor- 
wegian phonetician Western. "Ellis said that he made a 
distinction between I say [sei] and I say so [ai se* sou] ; 
he maintained that he had a monophthong before conso- 
nants: [se*m]; both Western and I heard, however, in- 
variably diphthongs in his pronunciation; also when he 
pronounced Latin urbes to us with his theoretical pronun- 
ciation, he said [urbe-is]" (the last word I wrote in Visible 
Speech). On later occasions, too, I noticed the same 
diphthongs in Ellis's speech, which have also been men- 
tioned by Sweet and others. (Ellis's own view is found 
in EEP. IV p. 1111, cf. p. 1152 on ou). Thus no argument 
can be drawn from the silence of eighteenth century 
phoneticians. Cooper's words (1685, Ellis p. 126). "Ai 
lenius prolata sonatur ut a in cane; fortius, plenum assu- 
mit sonuni diphthongi ai; ut brain," etc. seem to indicate a 
double pronunciation of ai, one with a strongly pronounced 
diphthong (never found in the a-words), and another 
with a 'milder' diphthong (also found in the a-words). 
If the latter survived both for ai and for a, it is easy to 
understand that it escaped notice, till in the nineteenth 
century observers became more trained, and perhaps the 
two elements of the diphthongs [el] and [o'u] had been 
more clearly differentiated. 

ei, ou. 

These two diphthongs, the regular developments of 
ME. long i and long u, modern [ai] and [au], need not 
detain us long. Victor's assumption that Shakespeare's 
sounds were [li] or [ij] in by, and [uu] or [uw] in how 



Diphthongs. 43 

leaves too little distance between these diphthongs and [r] 
in be and [a-] in too: if they were so similar to one another 
we should expect continual overlappings and confusions. 
Besides, this opinion is chiefly based on descriptions in 
such old 'phoneticians' as had no clear idea of what 
constitutes a diphthong and were spelling-bound in their 
views on most points (Bullokar, etc.). Hart's notation 
(with [e] and [o], not [a]) probably showed the then pre- 
valent pronunciation with fair exactness 1 ; these two 'fast' 
diphthongs were easily kept apart from the 'slow' ones 
in day and Mow by having a short first element and a 
more rapid upward movement, probably also by having 
the first element closer. 

The numeral feivp for 'fifth' (or e fift') is an interesting 
analogical formation that I do not remember having seen 
elsewhere in the old grammars, though the NED. records 
spellings like fyveth from the 14th and 15th centuries. 

Hart recognizes both -lei and -li for the ending -ly, 
which had in Middle English long and short i according 
to varying degrees of stress. In the same manner we 
find some endings with old u in a double form: -ous is 
either -ous with the diphthong and with the * which is 
due to (secondary) stress, or else -hz with both the vowel 
and consonant to be expected in a weak syllable. 2 
ending -our in chancellor, emperor, error, and predecessor, 
one might be inclined to take for the ordinary spelling 
"^7 35 b he says: "The Dutch [= Germans] doe vse also 
au, ei, and ie, rightly as I do hereafter.' If German « was pro- 
nounced then as it is now, this would make Harts ei more open 
than the svmhol e indicates in itself. 

* Voiced consonant after a weak vowel, voiceless consonant 
retained after a strong vowel, according to the parallel to Venn," a 
Law which I have mentioned ahove p. 16. 



44 Diphthongs. 

without any phonetic value, were it not that Shakespeare 
once rimes ours: progenitours and that corresponding 
pronunciations are recorded by Gill and Bullokar (see 
Vietor, 1. c. § 63), and in the anonymous Grammaire An- 
gloise (Paris 1625), which says: "De cette diphthongue ou 
[in thousand, etc.] deppend la terminaison our, - qu'il faut 
prononcer comme en Francois aouor, comme si c'estoient 
trois syllables, exemple our, nostre: sauiour . . .". 

In the group igli Hart has short i -f- h (§ 4), but for 
'higher' he writes heier; here ME. had a voiced consonant 
between the two vowels. 

au. 

This diphthong has various sources, as is seen in the 
words saiv; cause; laugh; all; change. In some of the words 
in which it corresponds to Anglo-French au before nasals, 
a too is found, ait is found before I only in those cases 
where Present English has [o # l] with I retained; shaul for 
'shall', and -aul in radiJcaul, etc., represent the formerly 
frequent, but now extinct forms which would now have 
sounded [fo'l, -o*l]; the weak-stress forms, which are also 
found in Hart, fal and -al, form the basis of the present 
pronunciation. Hart does not write au in those Z-groups 
in which I has now disappeared : chalk, half; he writes salt 
instead of saidt which we should have expected. His 
notations do not therefore throw much light on the dif- 
ficult questions connected with this diphthong. 

iu. 

This group of letters has three values in Hart's books. 
As a consequence of his view that [j] is merely a non- 
syllabic [i], it may stand for [ju], which has now become 
[ja]; the only instance is iung 'young'. Then it may stand 



Diphthongs. 45 

for [i] -f [u] in two separate syllables; thus in liomodhtzli, 
Tiuriuz, and notoriuzli, where, however, it is not absolutely 
impossible that he pronounced [ju] in one syllable. While 
these two cases present no serious difficulty, the third case 
does, as most modern scholars have taken Harts iu in 
words like use to mean not a diphthong, but the sound 
[y] with French u. This is done on the strength of one 
isolated passage, which it will therefore be necessary to 
examine as closely as possible. Unfortunately Hart's style 
shows nowhere to less advantage than in this important 
paragraph. To understand it, we must look at it in con- 
nection with all the related utterances in his book. 

Hart sets his face against the "abuse" of the vowels, 
i. e. writing a, e, i, 0, u for any other sound than the 
vowels [a, e, i, 0, uj. With regard to u, he therefore dis- 
approves of two things, the "abuse in sound" as in Eng- 
lish use and the "abuse for the consonant" as in English 
euer for ever. Unfortunately these two 'abuses' are not 
always kept clearly apart in his remarks. On p. 31 a he 
says that the French, the Spanish 1 , and the Brutes [i. e. 
Welsh] abuse u c in sounde', while the French, the Spanish, 
the Germaine and Italian, but not the auncient Brutes, 
abuse it for the consonant v. After some remarks on the 
similar double abuse of the letter i (for j and for [ei]) we 
come upon the famous passage (reprinted, with some slight 



1 Hart is not consistent on this point; in some passages he 
says or seems to say that Spanish u is abused in sound, but on 
p. 34b he says (correctly) that the Spanyard "abuseth" it "with vs 
and the Scottish, but not generally as the French doe," that is, « 
•with them means v, but not the French vowel. On p. 33< l , the 
French, Scottish, and Brutes, but not the Spaniards, are mentioned 
as having the wrong vowel sound of the u. 



46 Diphthongs. 

alterations, by Ellis, p. 167, and, after him, by Sweet, 
HES. p. 250): 

"Now to come to the u. I sayde the French, Spanish, 
and Brutes, I maye adde the Scottish, doe abuse it with 
vs in sounde, and for consonant, except the Brutes as is 
sayd: the French doe neuer sounde it right [i. e. for the 
sound u], but vsurpe ou, for it, the Spanyard doth often 
vse it right as we doe, but often also abuse it with vs: 
the French and the Scottish in the sounde of a Diphthong 1 : 
which keeping the vowels in their due sounds [that is, if 
we write them with the value of the letters that Hart 
advocates], commeth of i, and u, (or verie neare it) [this 
restriction is most important] is made and put togither 
vnder one breath, confounding the soundes of i, and u, 
togither: which you may perceyue in shaping thereof, if 
you take away the inner part of your tongue, from the 
vpper teeth or Gummes, then shall you sound the u, right, 
[this, then, is a description of u, but not as part of the 
French sound] or in sounding the French and Scottish 
u 2 , holding still your tongue to the vpper teeth or gums, 
and opening your lippes somewhat, you shall perceyue the 
right sounde of i." 

These last few lines describe accurately the formation 
of [y] as containing an articulation of the tongue, which 
is kept near the upper teeth or gums, and a lip-element, 
so that if— in modern phraseology — you unround the 
sound the result is an [i]. But there are two things that 
are not clear. First, does this describe the whole sound 
as invariable from beginning to end? Then why call it 
a diphthong? Or is it only one element of the diphthong? 

1 In the margin: iu, diphthong. 

" In the margin: iu, diphthong reduced into his elements. 



Diphthongs. 47 

That this is Hart's meaning, might perhaps be inferred 
from the word "holding still" : then we might paraphrase: 
"if instead of moving your tongue you isolate the begin- 
ning of the diphthong and unround it, you will find that 
it is really an [i]." This would be tantamount to a diph- 
thong [yu]. There is no doubt of the French sound having 
been then, as it is now, the monophthong [y] and not 
[yu], but what concerns us here is Hart's conception of 
the sound, which may, of course, have been wrong. 

The second thing that is not quite clear, is this : does 
Hart's description apply to the French (and Scottish) sound 
only,- or to the English u in use as well? English is not 
mentioned here, and in other places, too, where we might 
expect Hart to mention English u, he seems to avoid it. 
Thus, on p. 65 a , while mentioning the French orthography, 
he says "d'abius ov de u, in de skoti/ leik sound ov de 
iu diphthong," where it would have been more natural to 
mention the English sound, if he had considered them 
exactly alike. On p. 35 b he speaks of Dutch, i. e. High 
German "u, in the sound of iu, or the French and Scot- 
tish u." It is not impossible that in 1569 Hart more or 
less dimly perceived a difference between his English c iu' 
and French and Scottish u, though in 1551 he expressly 
identified English you with the sound in Fr. fust and Sc. 
gud. At any rate his words are too obscure to be taken 
as decisive evidence of the existence of the sound [y] in 
English. If they are so taken, I do not see how we shall 
avoid the consequence that the sound [o] (mid-front-round) 
existed also in his pronunciation, for on p. 35 b , imme- 
diately before the passage just quoted on ii, he says. 
[German] "o in the sound ce or eu." 1 It appears to me 



1 In his French transcriptions we find ««Mf 'deux 5 andtttM Y.u\\ 



48 Diphthongs. 

much more probable that Hart really pronounced [iu] in 
use (and [eu] in few) and that he felt at first, and never 
entirely overcame, the difficulty experienced by most of 
his countrymen in appreciating rounded front vowels, when 
heard in French and other languages. If Hart had really 
had the vowel [y] in his natural language, he would not 
have used two letters for it, but would rather have devised 
a new letter analogous to his consonantal letters. 

This is perhaps confirmed by the sentence quoted 
above, p. 34, in which you is given as an example of the 
second class of diphthongs, consisting of one short and 
another long vowel: iu'; on the same page, you is- once 
more written iu'. The same notation, with long u, is 
found once in triw c true' and once in vertiu'z 'virtuous'. 
But these are the only instances of the diphthong, whether 
in you or in use, etc., in which any mark of length is 
found. I take iu therefore to be one of those only ap- 
proximately exact notations which may be found in most 
phonetic texts of tolerable length, even the best, and wliich 
are sometimes due to carelessness, sometimes used deli- 
berately for convenience' sake where the writer sees that no 
misreading is possible. 1 Consequently I am inclined to read 
Hart's iu as [iu - ] in all the cases with which we are here 
concerned, that is, wherever it corresponds to French u 
(ui) or to OE. iw, eow (also in iup 'youth'). 

On the whole, I very much doubt the existence in 
Modern English and even in Middle English of the high- 



1 Thus Sweet in his Elementarbuch does not indicate the differ- 
ence between the [o] of [not] and [nou], the final unvoicing in [kaadz], 
the difference in length between [veig] and [meik] or between [send] 
and [sent], though he mentions all these points in describing the 
sounds. 



Diphthongs. 49 

front-round vowel [y]. 1 Old French u from Latin a was 
probably at once imitated by the English in an imperfect 
manner, as the sound itself was unknown in England. 
(See H. Moller's important arguments, reported by Hoofe, 
Engl. Studien VIII, 241.) The diphthong used as a sub- 
stitute may roughly be written [iu] ; at first it was probably 
pronounced as a level-stress diphthong (schwebender diph- 
thong) 2 , in which neither element preponderated; later 
the second element became lengthened and was made the 
'top' of the syllable as in Present English [ju - , juw], while 
in America the old level-stress diphthong may be still 
heard very frequently. But all English-speaking people 
except the very tip-top phoneticians invariably imagined, 
and still imagine, their [iu] or [ju*] to be an exact 'ren- 
dering of French u [y(")], just as Russians and other people 
do who have no front-round vowels in their own verna- 
cular. 3 

If this simple and perfectly natural theory is not the 
one accepted by most students of the history of English, 
the reason is the evidence found in the early authorities 
on English pronunciation. Now, this evidence (see espe- 
cially Ellis p. 163 ff., Sweet, HES. § 861 ff.) is of a very 



1 Apart from those southern dialects in which OE. // was re- 
tained in the beginning of the Middle English period. 

2 Cf. my Lehrbuch der Phonetik, 1904, § 214. 

3 The second element is now often pronounced not as a 
round, but as a mixed-round vowel [ii], closely similar to Norwegian 
hus. Some people even retain this mixed vowel when- the i| or [j] 
has been' lost, thus pronouncing [tru", blu', t/u\ d-jfl'] Tor trur. blue. 
chew, Jew (Lehrbuch der Phon. §157). This mixed pronunciation 
may be a survival of an old pronunciation. But it is true thai 
others have a pure back round vowel in true, etc., so thai with them 
rheum and room have the same vowel. 

Jespersen, John Hart's Pronunciation. 



50 Diphthongs. 

perplexing character owing to numerous contradictory 
statements found even in the words of one and the same 
old grammarian. 1 The latest attempt to explain them is 
that of Luick (Anglia XIV, 287). He says that as many 
early authorities identify English and French u, while 
others describe a diphthongic pronunciation, both pro- 
nunciations [y] and [iu] (or some other similar diphthong) 
must have obtained at the same time, the former among 
the upper and the latter among the lower classes; though 
[iu] finally extended itself to all classes of the people. 

This solution appears to me very far from convincing. 
It is not in itself an ordinary occurrence for two strata of 
a nation to have thus two distinct pronunciations of a par- 
ticular sound for a couple of centuries; at any rate I do 
not remember a single instance in any language. But it 
is even more improbable that this class distinction should 
have existed for two centuries without being once men- 
tioned or even hinted at in any one of the numerous works 
on English pronunciation produced in the period, although 
many of them give us abundant information on provin- 
cialisms and vulgarisms. Instead of distributing the 
authors of these works into two groups representing dif- 
ferent social strata— some are even said to belong to one 
stratum with regard to u and to another with regard to 



1 Let me quote one specimen, which has, I believe, escaped 
notice, but which is typical of the kind of expressions found in most 
of these 'authorities'. Howell (A new English Grammar, 1662, p. 14) 
says: "The English pronounce oftentimes u like the French, in a 
whistling manner, which sound is quite differing from the Spaniard 
and Italian, who prolate it in a manner like oo, as uno . . . But the 
English and French pronounce u as if it were the Diphthong eiv, 
as Cocu a Cuckold is pronounced as if it were written Cdkew; Cubit 
Kewbit, etc." 



Diphthongs. 51 

other sounds — it seems much more natural to say that 
some knew the correct French sound well enough to dis- 
tinguish it from the English, and others not, while on this 
particular point our Mend Hart represents, perhaps, an 
intermediate state of phonetic knowledge. 

Luick's list of old authors in favour of [y] is imposing 
enough numerically, but less so if we look more closely 
into what they actually say. Palsgrave (1530) is the first ; but 
in his words (as quoted by Ellis, p. 137, 163, and by Sweet, 
p. 249) I find only one thing about English u, namely 
that it was different from the French. On the other hand 
he sa} 7 s that Fr. u (and eu in some words) was like E. ew 
in reive an herbe, a mew for a hauke [both from Fr. w], 
a clew of threde, trew [both with E. diphthong]. Perhaps the 
words "resting apon the pronounsyng of hym" may mean 
"more monophthongic in Fr." Cheke (1555) says "Cum 
igitwr duke, tuke, lute, rebuke, ouk, tuk, Xut, pe^uK dicimus, 
Gre.cum u sonamus" and that Greek u "simplex est, nihil 
admixture, nihil alienum adjunctum habet." 1 This would 
be explicit if we could be certain that Cheke did not 
share the usual misconception that what is expressed by 
means of one letter must be also one simple sound. If 
Smith's dvk (1568) for duke is to be taken = [dyk], then 
we must necessarily take his yew, sneiv, slew, true, Uue to 
be sounded [y, sny, sly, try, bly], for he clearly iden- 
tifies the sound of all these words. Hart is the next 
authority alleged for [y]. Then comes Hi llokab who is 
so confused on most points that his short remark en the 
identity of Fr. and English u carries no weight. Cotgrave 
(1611) describes the sound "as if you whistle it out"; this 



1 Ellis p. 165 leaves out the words igitur and alienum, and 

prints sotuiremi's. 



52 Diphthongs. 

expression, which is found in other authors as well, does 
not prove much, cf. Howell supra. Gill (1619, 1621) is, 
as Sweet remarks, "not very definite"; if his v in vz 'use' 
means [y], then his nv 'new' also must mean [ny - ]. Gill 
has no clear conception of diphthongs, cf. his typically 
vague expressions about his j in sjn 'sign' (Jiriczek 
p. 24.17). Besides, we have Gill's distinct statement that 
he preferred writing one single letter even where he ad- 
mitted the sound to be composite (Nos aute in vocibus 
describendis, non simplices sonos distrahimus; sed distrac- 
tos potius in vnum coniungimus, p. 14.5). G. du Gres 
(1636) identifies Fr. u with English u in lute, duke, with 
Scotch gud and with German W; this is not calculated 
to inspire us with confidence. Wallis (1653) is really the 
most important witness for [y], because he was on the 
whole a good phonetician, though it must be admitted 
that his definitions of vowels and his general scheme of 
vowels contain several obscure points. He says that it is 
formed in the lips, but with smaller aperture than for 
[u-]; he identifies the Fr. and the Engl, sound and then 
says that foreigners can obtain about the same sound by 
trying to pronounce the diphthong in; if they place a 
thin 1 before u or w, as in Spanish ciudad, the result is 
only a little removed from the Engl, sound, which is, 
however, a simple sound, while iu is compound. Later 
he says again that it is a sound almost composed of i 
and w (sono nempe quasi composito ex % and w). Thus 
Wallis emphasizes the similarity to [iu] so much as al- 
most to make a diphthongic pronunciation indubitable; 
he evidently started from the belief that the letter repre- 
sented a single sound and stuck to this idea in spite of 
direct observation showing him that the best manner of 



Diphthongs. 53 

teaching the sound to foreigners was to make them pro- 
nounce i -f- u or w\ some slight difference that he heard 
between the English and the Spanish diphthong confirmed 
him in his cherished idea. 1 

Luick thinks that the [y] pronunciation disappeared 
in the eighteenth century; as the last representative he 
mentions Steele: "Noch Steele 1775 kennt den franz. 
?7-laut in einigen wortern f in the more refined tone of the 
court' (Ellis 1058)." But Steele's words are: "the English 
seldom or never sound the U in the French tone . . . except 
in the more refined tone of the court, where it begins to 
obtain in a few words." Accordingly, this is not a last 
survival of an old pronunciation, but a new fashion 
coming in and seizing only upon a few words, probably 
those felt to be recent loans. In the same manner edu- 
cated people may now be heard to use the correct French 
sound in such words as resume, cul-dc-lampe, edition de 
luxe, sanscidotte; but this of course proves nothing with 
regard to the fully naturalized words. 

I must here also mention Baret (1573), who says that 
some think this u to be rather a diphthong than a vowel, 
"being compounded of our English e [= v] and it, as 
indeed we may partly perceyue in pronouncing it. our 
tongue at the beginning lying flat in our mouth, and at 
the end rising up with the lips also therewithal! some- 
what more drawen togither." This I read as a description 
of [iu], no whit worse than most phonetic descriptions 
of that century; if Baret concentrated his attention on 
the upward movement of the bach of the tongue necessary 
for [u], he might very well describe the position for [i] 



1 Cf. also what Wallis says about the ew-diphthonge EJ P. 189 , 



54 Diphthongs. 

as he does. At any rate we have everything that con- 
stitutes a diphthong, and that diphthong has decidedly 
two things in common with [iu], namely some movement 
of the tongue and a contraction of the lips in the second 
element. But Ellis says that the only interpretation he 
can put on this "somewhat confused description is, that 
Baret was speaking of the [neutral] position of the tongue 
before commencing to utter any sound, and that when 
the sound was uttering, the tongue [Ellis means the front 
part, but why that more than the back?] rose and the 
lips rounded simultaneously," making [y - ]. In spite of 
Dr. Sweet's approval (HES. § 867) I think this a specimen 
of how not to interpret an old author's words. 

Nor do I think Ellis's interpretation of Holder very 
satisfactory. The passage in question is reprinted, though 
not very accurately, in EEP. p. 178. It is not very clear, 
but after several careful readings I understand it to mean 
that in Holder's u (his test word being rule) the articu- 
lation of i (in eel, ill) was followed by a labial articulation. 
It is true that there are expressions that would seem to 
show that the two articulations were simultaneous; but 
this was probably a mere self-delusion, and the words 
that point to sequence in time are really more decisive. 
The most important passage is the following (Elements 
of Speech. 1669, p. 88): 

"And in this, « and u are peculiar, that they are 
framed by a double motion of Organs, that of the Lip, 
added to that of the Tong; and yet either of them is a 
single Letter, and not two, because the motions are at the 
same time, and not successive, as are eu. pla. etc. Yet 
for this reason they seem not to be absolutely so simple 
Vowels as the rest, because the voice passeth successively 



Diphthongs. 55 

from the Throat to the Lips in «, and from the Palat to 
the Lips in u, being there first moulded into the figures 
of oo and i, before it be fully Articulated by the Lips .... 
I have been inclin'd to think, there is no Labial Vowel, 
but that the same affection from the Lips may, somewhat 
in the nature of a Consonant, be added to every of the 
Vowels, but most subtlely, and aptly to two of them, 
whose Figures are in the extreams in respect of Aperture 
and Situation," i. e. to oo and i. 

I have here italicized what seems to speak most in 
favour of my theory. What is indubitable, is that Holder's 
i is made into his u, and his oo (in fool, full; cut, coot; 
tut, toot) into his a (in two, which is unfortunately the 
only example given) by the addition of the same labial 
element. Ellis thinks that this addition is ''rounding," 
that is a simultaneous lip-action, and says that Holder 
"very acutely anticipated Mr. M. Bell's separation of the 
lingual and labial passages, and the possibility of adding 
a labial passage to every lingual one." But this view 
obliges Ellis to say that as Holder's oo was = his a minus 
rounding, he must have meant it to be the high-back- 
unround vowel, though Ellis admits that it is impossible 
to believe that fool was ever pronounced with that very 
rare and very difficult vowel. My own interpretation is 
that we have in both cases a labial vowel, approaching a 
consonant, that is [u] or [w], added after the vowel, making 
[i] into [iu] and [u()j into [u(')w]. There is now no diffi- 
culty in Holder's statement that this element can be added 
to any vowel, while it is not easy to add rounding tit a 
vowel that is already rounded, as [o] was according to 
Holder's own description. If I am right, Holder is the 
first to discover the diphthongic character of tl hi vowel in 



56 Diphthongs. 

tico, described by Batchelor and Sweet as [uw], and it is 
not strange that he should have discovered it in the case 
of a final vowel only; cf. Ellis on the similar diph- 
thong [ei]. 

These then, are the witnesses for [y] ; they are, as 
we have seen, none of them very precise, and their evi- 
dence may even partly be construed in favour of [hi]. On 
the other hand, some of the witnesses on the opposite 
side leave little to be desired. Desainliexs (Holliband, 
1566, see EEP. 838 and 228 note) says, "we [French] do 
thinke that when Englishmen do profer ,v, they say, you: 
and for q, we suppose they say kiou: but we sound ,v, 
without any helpe of the tongue, ioyning the lips as if 
you would whistle; and after the manner that the Scots do 
sound Gud." Mason's Grammaire Angloise (1622) gives 
hjou, you, douliou, niou and nious as (French) transcriptions 
of the names of the letters q, v (u), w, and of the words 
new, news. If he gives elsewhere iu as a transcription of 
u, in muse, etc., I agree with Western (Engl. Studien 36. 
125) in rejecting the pronunciation [iy] which Mason's 
editor Brotanek supposes him to have signified: in these 
words Mason was led astray by the orthography, while in 
giving the pronunciation of q, etc.. he had to trust his 
ears exclusively; at any rate his iu shows that the sound 
was not simply identical with French u [y]. An Alphabet 
Anglois contenant la prononciation des lettres avec les 
declinaisons & coniugations (Paris 1625, in the Bodleian) 
gives Q. quiou. V. you. W. double you. Another Gram- 
maire Angloise. Povr facilement et promptement apprendre 
la langve Angloise (Paris 1625, ibd., by the same author?) 
says: "V se prononce quasi comme O, comme Vp .... 
Quelques fois iou, comme vse, iouse: abuse abiouse: sute 



Diphthongs. "7 

sjoute." It will be seen that if English people were apt 
to identify French u [y] with their own sound, the French 
themselves, just as in our own days, heard the difference 
very clearly! Erondell (1605), though not very explicit 
(see HES. § 869), yet clearly states that the English u in 
murtherer is nearer to the sound in French unir, musique 
than the ordinary English sound in music, etc. Butler 
(1633) says that "ee and i short with to, have the veri 
sound of u long: as in hiu\ lueeic, true appeereth," (other 
examples of the same sound due, rue, sue. stue, Hue, etc.) 
and in another place "*e, as the vouel ee (whose sound 
it hath) before to, is short: as in view, Mew." This I take 
as indicating [iu], though Ellis (p. 171) thinks it possible 
that Butler may have said [y\ Price (1668) says that u 
is "long as in Jute, muse, refuse as if it were the compound 
of iu\" 

But an even better witness than all these 1 is that 
excellent phonetician John "Wilkixs (1668), whom it is 
rather curious to see ranged among vulgar speakers (he 
was warden of Wadham College, Oxford, master of Trinity. 
Cambridge, one of the founders of the Royal Society, and 
died as Bishop of Chester!) He says: "As for the third 
of the Labials, the u GaUicum, or whistling u, though it 
cannot be denied to be a distinct simple vowel; yet it is 
of so laborious and difficult pronunciation to all those 
Nations amongst whom it is not used (as to the English) 
especially in the distinction of long and short, and framing 
of Diphthongs, that though I have enumerated it with 
the rest, and shall make provision for the expression of 



1 Better also than the "Welsh writers who transcribe uw, which 
is a diphthong though it seems difficult to ascertain exactly what 
was the first element of it. 



58 Diphthongs. 

it, yet shall I make less use of it, than of the others; 
and for that reason, not proceed to any further explication 
of it." In another place he says that "(u) is (1 think) 
proper to the French, and used by none else. 1 ' It is not 
quite correct when Ellis says that the only word which 
contains long u that Wilkins transliterates, is communion; 
he writes the three words t« r you\ criasified 'crucified', 
and carnnmicm with the same diphthong; a is his sign 
for the sound that is found short in full, long in boote, 
foole, etc. and that he identifies with French ou. 

If the view here advanced is correct, the difference 
between the two fellow-collegians Wilkins and Wallis, 
which Ellis finds 'striking 5 (EEP. 176, cf. also Vietor, 
1. c. 29), is thus reduced to a perfectly natural difference 
in the perception of a foreign sound or in familiarity 
with French pronunciation, while both had the same 
English diphthong. 

The same diphthong may confidently be assumed 
for Shakespeare's pronunciation, as shown by his rimes 
you: do, suing: wooing, abuse it: lose it, though generally 
the [iu]-words rime only with one another 1 — both facts 
easily explicable on the hypothesis of a wavering or level- 
stress diphthong, in which occasionally at least the second 
element predominated. Similar rimes are found in con- 
temporary poets, in Fletcher's The Faithful Shepherdess 
for instance you: sue: knew, yew: rew ('rue' verb), you: 
true, you: sue, hew ('hue'): you, ewe: hew ('hue'), true: 



1 Vietor (1. c. 32) explains the rime you : do as based on the 
unstressed [u(')] of [iu], and the stressed [u 1 ] of do. But in the line 
in question (Macb. III. 5. 13 Loues for his own ends, not for you) 
you is emphatic. 



Gill's criticism. 59 

adieu, true: view, true: you, you: thereto, youth: truth, 
you: new: true. 

Finally I may say that the [y]-theory implies certain 
difficulties which w r e avoid if we adopt the view here 
advocated. It is not probable that words like new, yew, 
etc. should have had first the diphthong, then the monoph- 
thong, and then again the diphthong (cf. Smith and others, 
above), [iu] seems necessary to explain the development 
of [/, 5] in sure, pressure, measure, etc. just as in im- 
pression, vision, etc. If [y] had been an alternative 
pronunciation, we should have expected [s, z] to have 
remained unchanged at least in the pronunciation of some 
people. On every point the [iu]-theory seems natural and 
consistent, while any supposition of [y] as the pronun- 
ciation of some particular period of Middle or Modern 
English or of some particular social stratum involves us 
in complications and difficulties. 

Other diphthongs and triphthongs. 

The rest of the diphthongs and triphthongs, see 
word-lists 6, 7, 8, 16, 17, 18, 31, 38, 39, really present 
some veiy intricate problems; but as the material offered 
by Hart for a satisfactory solution is comparatively scanty, 
I shall refrain from discussing them here. 

Gill's criticism. 

We are now in a position to form a judgmeni of 
the correctness of Gill's often-quoted remarks on Bart, 
which have served as basis for the common depreciation 
of our author's pronunciation. The passage is found in 
Jiriczek's edition, p. 13. Gill is speaking about tin- pre- 
vious attempts to improve English spelling, more parti- 



60 Gill's criticism. 

cularly about the necessity of having new letters. He 
mentions Smith's endeavours and approves of Mulcaster's 
criticism that Smith's new letters are neither pretty to 
look at nor easy to write. Then he goes on to say that 
Hart (Chester) tried as well as he could to remedy that 
defect; but, besides leaving out some very necessary 
letters, he aimed not at following our language by his 
letters, but at leading it. (Sed ille, prseterquam quod 
nonnullas literas ad vsum pernecessarias omisit, sermonem 
nostrum characteribus suis non sequi, sed ducere medita- 
batur). Now, it is quite possible that these words apply 
rather to Hart's new letters than to his pronunciation; 
the whole context and the words characteribus suis seem 
to point in that direction. 1 But let us grant that the 
interpretation given by Ellis and all his followers is correct 
and that Gill really blamed Hart for favouring a pronun- 
ciation that was just coming in (for Gill cannot have 
thought of Hart as inventing totally unheard-of pronun- 
ciations and expecting his countrymen to follow him!) 
and of thus disregarding the older and more conservative 
type of pronunciation preferred by Gill. Whether or not 
Gill's words will bear that interpretation, it will not be 
amiss to examine Hart's pronunciation from that point 
of view. In the following points Hart represented a pro- 
nunciation that was going out of use at the end of the six- 
teenth century: 

the back quality of [a] and [a*], 



1 In like manner his words on Bullokar (Bulokerus vt paucula 
mutauit, sic multa fideliter emendauit) must refer to the letters and 
not to pronunciation: B. introduced few new letters and merely 
corrected the traditional spelling (by means of his dots and accents) 
while keeping it faithfully in the main. 



Gill's criticism. 61 

the occasional [e] in the ending -te, -ty, and in 

country, 
the retention of the voiceless open consonant, where 

the ordinary spelling has gh, 
the retention of I before /' and k, 
the frequency of weak e in the endings -ed and -es, 
probably also the [r] in title, etc., see p. 28, 
[au] in answer, change, etc., and [eau] in beauty. 
In some at least of these points Hart was more con- 
servative than Gill, who, for instance, did not pronounce 
I in the position mentioned, though he kept it in his 
spelling. On the whole the difference in pronunciation 
(not spelling!) between the elder and the younger man 
is exactly such as we should expect considering the inter- 
val of fifty years between their books. But I am at a 
loss to point out a single instance in which Hart's pro- 
nunciation could with certainty be said to anticipate 
changes that took place later, or even to represent a 
change just then beginning or found in vulgar speech 
only (except, perhaps, hiiol and the solitary instance of 
uonli). 

Gill goes on to mention fifteen words in Hart's 
spelling to which he takes exception: "Non nostras hie 
voces habes, sed Mopsarum fictitias." That is to say in 
plain English, they are slovenly and effeminate forms. 
His examples are all of them taken from one page in 
Hart's book, and perhaps his objection to them would 
have been modified, had he read the whole of the book- 
carefully. In six of the words (pray, way, say, they, 
may, said) we have Hart's [e']— by Gil] printed e as if it 
were short— instead of the diphthong; in one word (known) 
similarly [o*] instead of [on]. In the latter case we know 



62 Gill's criticism. 

that Hart's pronunciation agreed exactly with Gill's and 
that he had himself changed his notation in M, which 
Gill did not know; and I have tried to prove that in the 
[ei] diphthong, too, the disagreement between them was 
only apparent. In of and ivith Gill cannot have consi- 
dered Hart's pronunciation as particularly "mopsey"-like, 
as in another passage he indicates the pronunciation with 
final voiced consonant [ov, widj as the ordinary one, and 
says that the other is not heard except sometimes when 
learned people are reading aloud; here Hart really repre- 
sents an older stage of the language since he naturally 
pronounced [of, wi£] before a word beginning with a 
voiceless consonant. In you and use Hart's iu probably 
meant exactly the same sound as Gill had, and the same 
is undoubtedly the case with regard to Hart's [eij for I. 
Hart's u in we (and ivith) is only another manner of 
writing Gill's w, and now we have only three words left, 
answer, where H's au indicates an old-fashioned pronun- 
ciation (corresponding to Gill's own aunt for ant), reading 
with [r] — not, as Gill prints it, short [ij— (which I have 
explained above), and [bue'J for boy (which I cannot ex- 
plain, see § 38). The real differences are therefore very 
small indeed, and Gill was probably induced to use the 
word Mopsarum by Hart's [e - ] (which he misinterpreted) 
and by the [r] in reading, which he erroneously thought 
an instance of the general change of [e - ] to [i*J, which 
was unknown to Hart's time and in Gill's time was 
only just coming in. On p. 33 Gill specially mentions 
"pugostoloi nostrse MopsaB" as making everything thinner 
and saying, among other things, [ke - pn] for [ka'pn] 
capon, [mi't] for [me'tj meat, and [ine'dz, pie - ] for [inaidz, 
plai] maids, play. But Hart's case is quite different, since 



Luick on Hart. 63 

he kept [e - ] and [i] neatly distinct and did not confound 
a in capon and ai in maid. 

My conclusion therefore is, that too much importance 
has of late been attached to Gill's inconsiderate attack 
on Hart, and that the latter deserves a place of honour 
as the best representative in the sixteenth century of good, 
educated English Pronunciation. 

Luick on Hart. 

My final view is thus very far removed from that 
of Luick, who, after mentioning Palsgrave, Salesbury, 
Smith, and Bullokar as the chief authorities for the six- 
teenth century, goes on to say (Untersuchangen zur engl. 
lautgeschichtc 1896, p. 11): "Ihnen wiirde Hart anzureihen 
sein, wenn er nicht so sehr in seiner tendenz befangen 
ware. Es kommt ihm darauf an, die echten und wahren 
lautwerte der fiinf vokalzeichen zu ermitteln und sie wo- 
moglich wiederherzustellen." I do not see how he could 
be biassed in his presentment of English pronunciation 
by his purely scientific endeavours to find out how the 
vowels were pronounced by the ancient Romans. Nor 
does he deserve blame for then applying this knowledge 
in settling the values in which to use the letters in pho- 
netic writing. He was only doing much what most 
phoneticians of note do nowadays. In another place 
(p. 183) Luick says that Hart is "im groben irrtum" 
when he identifies ai and long e. Luick gives a very 
different explanation of this identification from the one 
attempted in this paper. Hart "will die sprache meistern 
[no one who has read him carefully will believe that], 
womoglich die 'wahren unci alten laute' der fiinf vokalzeichen 
wieder herstellen. Das si>, welches er meines erachtens fur 



64 Luick on Hart. 

a und ai sprach, konnte er daher nicht als selbstandigen 
laut anerkennen, sondern schlug es zu dem ja nahestehen- 
den e (fur me. e), sobald es ai geschrieben wurde, aber 
natiirlich nicht dort, wo es a wiedergab." Such a line 
of thought is utterly foreign to Hart's nature. If he had 
pronounced a and ai alike, he would have written them 
alike. He was an honest scholar who knew what he was 
about, and that was, in his own words: 

"to vse as many letters in our writing, as we doe 
voyces or breathes in speaking, and no more: and neuer 
to abuse one for another, and to write as we speake: 
which we must needes doe if we will euer haue our 
writing perfite." (p. 6 a .) 

Let me end by quoting Hart's true words about his 
own work (p. 3 a ): 

"I trust it may doe some good (though not in my 
dayes) to the posteritie, for whose sakes I thinke my 
labour well bestowed." 



65 



Word-Lists. 



In the following lists, as in the quotations contained in the 
preceding disquisition, I have given Hart's own spelling with the 
following changes: tf, dg are substituted for Hart's looped G and 3; 
p and 9 for his looped t and d; I is printed for his looped I as 
Hart himself did in M (see p. 12). Further I have not here re- 
produced Hart's superfluous and inconsistently used acute accent to 
denote shortness; it would only have complicated matters (discretion, 
for instance, is written diskresion twice, diskresion once, but both 
writings denote exactly the same sounds). The dot which Hart 
prints under the letter, is here for convenience sake placed after 
the letter. 

The order followed is i, e, a, 0, «, consonants; after each 
vowel are given in separate lists the diphthongs beginning with the 
same vowel. In order not to swell the lists some of the h and r 
groups have been put down in separate lists. In each list the words 
are arranged alphabetically according to the received spelling. The 
instances of some frequent endings, such as -li, -lei, -ed, -es, have 
been collected into separate subordinate lists. Each list comprises all 
the words containing the sound concerned, and all except the very 
shortest words therefore occur in more than one of the lists. As 
for words spelled in more ways than one the number of times each 
spelling occurs is indicated, -f- signifying "frequently.'' 

The following abbreviations have been used 

A: dot (mark of length) erroneously omitted in Hart. 

B: reminiscence of traditional spelling. 

C: other misprints. 

D: doublets, cf. p. 14 ff. 

M: Methode (1570). 

OM: both in Orthographie (1569) and M. 

Words without the letters M or OM are found in Orthographie 
alone. 

Jespersen, John Hart's Pronunciation. 6 



66 Word-Lists. 

§ i. r (long), 

api-r, -d ilmr M (= ?) 

apprring M krp OM, -ing 

asprr, -d, -ing, cf. p. 28 likt 1 B? cf. ei § 15 

br M+, bring 0+, cf. i, e lrv 1, cf. i § 2 

§ 2, 11 mi- O 1, M 2, mi O 2, M 3 
bili'f M (unstressed) D, me 1 B 

bili'v OM mrt adj. 

bisrt/, -ing M mi-ter, -s 

bli-s (= bless vb.) C?, cf. e ni- M (= ?) 

§ 11 ni-d 

bodi- 1, bodi 2, boddi M ni'dful 

bri'drn M (== brethren) ni'dl M 

bri-fli 1, briefli 2 B, cf. § 7 ni'ds 

tf'vr prrst 

tf'vz prosrdeth (B th for £) 

t/rfest kuin M 

t/eritrr rrd +, -ing + (= read p. 27) 

kirn (= dean NB.) si', si-n, si'ing 

deri'vd +, derivd 2 A; cf.p. 28 srk (= seek) 

devrzd 1, cf. ei § 15 srm, -d 

i-1 M (= eel) fv O 2, M 1, /i 2 D 

i-vn 2, cf. i § 2 sprt/, -es 

exersi'z, -ez, -ing; cf. p. 28 spidi, -er 

frdr M (in) sti'd (ov, = stead p. 27) 

foTtrfr (= foreteeth) strrks (= streaks pi.) 

grv O + (grvn 1, dot surtnes 

doubtful), cf. i § 2 tilD 

grrk, -s di* M 

hi- O 2, M 4; cf. i § 2 fci-f M, thif O (B th for I>) 

hil M 1 (= heel), cf. i § 2 i>rr OM 

houb'i-t (= howbeit) titl, -s; cf. p. 28 



Word-Lists. 



67 



tri" (in t/eritir) 

undiskrrt 

ui' M 2, cf. i § 2 

uiri M (= weary) 

uilr M (= Willy?) 



ui't + (to wit), cf. i § 2. In 
the old-spelling part, Hart 
writes to weete 

i- (= ye) 



§ 2. i (short) stressed. 

Cf. ih § 4, ir § 5. 



abridgment, -s 

afinite 

bi O +, M 2 (= be, NB. un- 
stressed), cf. § 1 

bin 0+ (= been) 

begin, -e£, -ing 

betuikst 1, betuixt + 

bil 

bring, bringing 

sichore (= chicory) 

t/ild 1, t/eild 1, t/ilder 1, 
t/ildrn M 1 

khrist O 1, krist M 2 (= 
Christ) 

kommit M 

konsider, -dered, -dred 

kontiniual 

kontiniu 2, kontiniued 2, 
kontinued 1 B 

definision 

delivr M 

derivd 1, cf. r § 1 

derision 

deziruz 1 B, cf. ei § 15 



dik (= Dick) 

did OM 

diferens, -es 

difering 

dilidjent 

dimmi/ 

diph]bongs 3, diphthong 3 

distans 

divers +, diuers 1 (B u for v), 
cf. § 15 ei; first syllable 
probably unstressed 

diverslei 2, deiverslei 1 (prob. 
unstr.) 

est-uind 

ingland 

ingli/ adj. & vb. 

epistls 

ivl M 1, A? (= evU) 

ivn 1, iven 1 A, cf. i' § 1 

figiur, -s 

figured B? 

filbert M 

fiy 

fit 



Word-Lists. 



fitli 1, -lei 1 

forgiv M 

forgivnes M 

fril> M 

gifts M 

givO+, Ml, grvO+, give|)M 

givn 3, gi - vn (dot doubt- 
ful) 1 

giver 0, givr M 

giltles M 

hi 0+, M (unstressed), hi' 
02 M4 D 

hil M (probably A for hrl 
heel) 

him OM 

hinder 

hinderans 

his O + M +, hiz O + M +, D 
cf. § 42 

histori-ureiters 

if+, iv 2 D, see p. 17 

ignorant 

il 

ilmr M (= ?) 

imads M 

imita"t 

in OM 

inkre's sb. 

indifrentlei 1, indiferentli 1 

iner 

instruments 

intu OM 



inuard 

in/ (= Irish) B 

is 2, Ml, izO+, M2, cf. 

§42 
it OM 
ivori 

kingdum M 
kirk OM, in given as 

northern 
kit 

lim M 
lip, -s 
list 
litl 

living, cf. r § 1 
mi cf. mi" § 1 
mit/ (see mikl) 
michaelmas 1 B, mit/elmas 1, 

mihel 1, see § 4 remark, 
mikl (= miclcle, given as 

northern "for our mit/ or 

mut/") 
milk 

miller M 

miseiv (= missive) 
mistres 
misteri 

mit/, see mikl above 
nikles (= Nicholas) 
omited 
opinion 
oridjinal 



Word-Lists. 



69 



pertikuler 
fizik 

Pig 

pild (= pilled?) 

preposisions 

prik, -s, -ing 

primitivs 

prins, -es (pi.) 

print sb., -s 

print vb., -ed, -ing 

printers 

private B 

privi 

provided B 

kuik 

rekapitulat 

resitej), cf. p. 28 

rit/ard M 

rig M 

river 

/i02 (unstressed) cf. r § 1 

signifei 1, -feiej) 3, -feing 1, 

-fi 1 
simpl 1, -pie 1 B 
sinz M 
siiigl 
singuler 
singulerlei 
sister, -s 
sit 0, sit|) M 
six 1, siks M2 
smijj M 



stik 

stil 

silabl, -s 

derm 

deruid, derail 

£ik OM 

]?imbl M 

I)in OM 

I)ing OM, -s 

pink, mi pinks 1, mi dinks 1 

dis O +, diz +, M 2 D, see 

§42 
tib 

til prep, 
tiladj 

tild (= tilled) 
tit 

thriakl (= treacle) 
imprikt 
until 
unuritn 

vises 1 B, veises 1 
vizard M 
vizit M 
ui 0+, Ml (unstressed), ur 

M2 
huerin i-, hue'rin 1 
hueruid 1, -uij) M 1 
huit/' Of M ,, buty 2 C 
uil OM 
uili- M (= Willy?, trill n = 

will he?) 



70 



Word-Lists. 



ui/ M 

uit sb., -s 

uit 1, ui't+ (in to wit) 

uid+, wij) + D, see p. 17 

§ 3. i short 

Cf. ir 
aksidents 
aktivz 
advertized 

aduertizrnent (B u for v) 
advoutri M 
afinite 
alegori 

aulmihti OM, al- M 
analodji 
aunsient 
ani OM 
apelativ 
artikl, -s 

-a(')sion see -ion § 28 
aspiration 1 (B t), -sion 1 
autoritiz 
beautifi 
bi-, cf. be- § 12 

bikauz+, bikaus 2 

bifor 01, Ml, be-0 + 

bigun cf. be- 

bilif M 

bili-v OM 

bisrt/, -ing M 

bi-iond 



uidin OM 
uitnez M b 
uritn 



unstressed. 

§5- 

benefits M 

bodi 2, bodi 1 1, boddi 

Ml 
biuried M 
kalumniators 
kapital 
kariadj 

katerin (= Catherine) 
ka|)olik M 
kavilalasions (C for Tcavila- 

sions) 
t/ariot 
t/astizing 
t/eri 
t/eritri - 
chronikl 
komodious 
komodiuzlei 
konioditi 3, -te 1 
kompanion 
koraparizon 2, -son 1 
kontrari, kontrariez 1, -ries 2 
kontrari-ueiz 
konvenientli 
kopi, kopies B 



Word-Lists. 



71 



kurtezi 

krusifeiing O, kriusifeid M 

kuriuz 

kuriozite 

da'vid 

defmision 

derivasions +, -tion 1 (Btffors) 

diskreibd 

dilidjent 

dimini/ 

diminusiou 

direkting 

dist/ardj 

diskoinodite 

diskuradjiiigs 

disku"rs 

diskresion 

disorder 

disordring 

divers, see § 2 

e*zili 

e'zi 2, ezi 1 A?, cf. below 

ezzi 
e'djipt M 
int/auntment 
indeuor (B u for v) 
indiref) M 
end sin 

ingli/ adj. & vb. 
ennemi M, enemiez O 1, 

enimies O 1 
envi sb., envied 



espesialei 1, -siaulei 1 

etimologi 1 (B g), -d^i 2 

evri 2, Ml, everi 2 

evident 

experiens 

experiment vb. 

ezzi M (= ? ezi above, easy) 

fleming 

folio 

glori MA? 

gramarian, -s A? 

gresians A? 

harri M 

histori-ureiters 

hoUi M 

imita't 

-ing : in 57 and in M 5 
participles and verbal 
nouns; in one word: riy : 
fin M, -in is evidently a 
misprint for -ing 

inklein M 

inkre's vb. 

indifrentlei 1, indifereutli 1 

institusions, cf. § 9 remark 

instruksion, -s 

intu OM 

invented 

invension, -s 

inventors, -terz, -ters 

-ion see § 28 

in/ 



72 



Word-Lists. 



italian 

ivori 

d jerkin 

la'di 

latin, -s 

le'djibl 

-li, cf. -lei § 15: 

akordingli 

bri'fli, briefii 

komonli 1, -lei 2 

konvenientli 

deli M 

e'zili 

gladli 

holli M (= holy) 

indiferentli, -frentlei 

lardjli 

leivli 

niuli 

notoriuzli 

onli 0+, onli 0+, 
uonli M 

perfetli 1, -lei 3 

plenli 

plurali 

rihtli 

sekondli 

/ortli 

softli 

strand jli 

sufisientli 2, -lei 3 

frirdli 1, -lei 1 



triuli 2, -lei 1 

uniuersali (B u for v) 
inani OM, manni M 
marriner M 
mari M ('indeed') 
marri M (join in marriage') 
rnari M (= Mary) 
mersi M 
meri OM 
miskonstru'ing 
misplasing 
nmltitiud 
muzik 
misteri 
nesesari 
noting 
notoriuzli 
not-uid-standing 
obedient B 

okupied 1 B, -peied 1 
ofis, -es 
opinion 
oridjinal 
orthographi 
parenthezis 
pekulier 

pheni (= penny, see p. 13) 
fizik 

plentiful 
posteriti 
premisez 
primitivs 



Word-Lists. 



73 



pnvi 

profit 

prod jeni tors 

prormnsiasion 

prosperiti 

kuantiti 1, -tie 1, -tiz 1 

radikaul 

redi 

rekapitulat 

rhetorik 

satisfei, -d 

skoti/ 

semiuo'kals (u B?) 

signifei, -feie|), -feing, -fi 

-sion, see o § 28 (-ion) 

Spaniard 

spani/ 

spesiaul 

spidi, -dier 

studi sb. 

studied 

sufisient 



sufisientli 2, -lei 2 

superfluite 

transitori 

treatis 2, -tiz 4, -siz 1 

thuni (= tunny) 

tutti M 

tuentij) M 

undiskrrt 

uniform, -lei 

uniuersali B 

unposibl 

veri (cf. verelei) 

virdjjin M 

vizit M 

vois +, M ; voises (i) O + 

ui'ri M 

uidin OM 

uidout 0, uiddout M 

u'ur/ip M 

urdines (= ivorthiness) 

u"r3i 

zakari M 



§ 4- 
aulmihti 1, M 2, almihti 

Ml 
ariht 

hih 0+, cf. heier 
liht sb. 

With regard to Michael, Hart says (p. 49 a ): "huer-az 
de beter lerned sort ha*v iuzd ch. in micbaelinas. az't-ue'I 
uritn ui3 kh, or k, alo-n, az abu'v: in mani \>\;\srs ov 



ih. 

mihel see below 

riht 

rihtli 

siht 1, sight B 1 



74 Word-Lists. 

ingland de kuntreman iz akustumed tu' se" for de quarter 
de 1 [misprint for de - ] mit/elmas: and iet hi-uil kaul hiz 
kompanion mihel." Mihel here may be a misprint for 
mikel, but it is more probable that it reflects the ME. forms 
Mihael, Mighel, Mihel, MygheU, Myghell, Myghele, Mighill 
mentioned in NED. 

§ 5. ir stressed and unstressed. 

afirmd sir 

aspirasion 1, -tion 1 skuirel M 

birds stiring 

konfirmasion £ird 1, M, dird 1 

first OM fcirdli 1, -lei 1 

hir 2, her 1 virdgin M. 

kirk OM (in as northern) 

§ 6. ie\ 

hiel M (= heal) mie - n (= mean vb.), cf. e* 

hie-r M (= here) cf. § 7 § 10, ea § 16. 

§ 7- ie. 
briefli 2, briefnes 1 B, cf. r hierbefoT +, -bi- 1 
dier (=• dear) hierbei 

hier +, cf. § 6 hierof 

hierafter hierunder 

Cf. alsokontrariez, kuantitie, studied, sufisientli (and -lei). 

§ 8. ieu. 

ieu OM (= ewe) mieu OM (= mew as a cat). 

fieu 1, feu 1 (= feiv) 

§ 9- iu. 
abius sb. akiut 

abiuz, -d, -eth (B th for £) asiurans 



\ 



Word-Lists. 



75 



asiured 

bliu M (= blue) 

briuts (= Brides, i. e. Welsh) 

biuried M (= buried) 

kontiniual 

kontiniu 2, kontiniued 1, 

kontinued 1 C? 
kre*tiur M 

kriusifeid M, krusifeiing 
diu (= due) 
figiur, -s 
fliut 
friut 

hebriu+, -s 1, -z 1, hebriu 1 
[instruments, see p. 28, 33] 
enterliuds 
dzjui'n 1, djiu'ined 1, (=join, 

-ed, cf. Gill) 
multitiud 
natiur 
niu OM 
niuli 
peradventiur 1 , peraduentiur 

1 (B u for v) 
pleziur 



piuer (= pure) 

rediused 

refiuz sb. 

riud 

riudlei 

riulz sb. 

riuled 

superfliuz 2, -fhrz 2 

siuer 1, siur 2 

threziur 

triu 1, triir 1 

triuli 2, trin lei 1 

tiun 

tiutors 1, tutors 1 B 

ius sb. 0+, M, iuz 1 C 

iuz vb. 0+, M, iuzd, iuzest, 
iuzej), iuzing 

viuer (= viewer) 

vertiu, -z 

vertiuz 1, vertiirz 1 (= vir- 
tuous) 

in 0+, M, iir 2 

iur OM 

iuj). 



§ io. e- (long). 
*abuvse - d 3, abuvse'd 3 auluais 01, auluai 01. 



*akue - ntans 

*age-n OM 

*age'nst O 1 M, agenst 3 

*aulue'z M, 0+, alue'z 2, 



(On p. 64", line 3 from 
bottom, one copy has aul 
lies and the other auluez 

or auliif'/.) 



76 



Word-Lists. 



*ate - n 

*a-ue' 

be-dl 

beT OM (= bear vb.) 

bene-d M 

be-ter 1 C, cf. e § 11 

bue - (= boy § 38) 

bre'k 

bre'J) sb. +, bre|) +, bre'ds 3, 

bre'dz 1, bre9es 1 
bred vb. 2, bre'dd +, breded 

1, bredd 1, breeding 
se*s M (= cease?) 
*serte - n 3, serten + 
*t/e-n M 

*t/e*r (= chair) 

konse'vd M 

*konstre , n, -d 

*konte - nd 

kuntre* 2 (= country) cf. 
kuntreman 1 

kre'tiur M 

*de- M, de- OC, de'z 3, 
M2, dez Ml A 

*de-li M 

del (— deal sb.) 

del) 

e-t/ 1, et/ uder 1 D 

e'r, e'rz (= ear) 

6-i$ M 1 cf. § 13 (= earth) 

czd, cf. e § 11 

ezili 



czi 2, cf. e § 11 

e - er M (= e'er for ever?) 

e'dgipt M 

e - 5er 3 (= either) cf. § 11 

extre'm 

*fe-r OM (— fair adj.) 

*fe-frles M 

fe*r (= fear) 

gre't OM, cf. greter § 11 

he- M 1 B, cf. r § 1 

he'rer (= hearer) 

he'ring (= hearing) 

he I) 

hev 

he'vu M (= heaven) 

he'briu 1, cf. e § 11 

inkre's sb. & vb. 

dje'zus M 

*ke* M (= key or quay?) 

He' M, leing 

led (= lead vb.) M 

le-f 

le'rn 1, cf. er § 13 

le Trier 

lev, -ing 

le'djibl 

*me-d (= maid) M 

*mainte*ner 

*me- (= may) OM +, me 1 A 
or D 

*me- (= May) M 

me'nel) cf. ie - § 6, ea § 16 



Word-Lists. 



77 



me - ning, cf. ea § 16 

ner OM, uelne'r, nerer p. 29 

ne"hbur, -z M 

*ne*der (=■• neither) cf. e 

§11, o §27 
*obe" 
*obte"nd 
*pe'n 

*pe*nted, cf. ai § 24 
*pe - r+, pe'rz+, pe'rs 3 (= 

pair) 
pe*r M (= pair or pear?) 
pe*s M (= peace) 
perscv 
*ple*nli 
*ple* 
*ple zant 
*ple"ers 

ple'z 3, plezd 1 A 
*pre - r OM (= prayer) 
'^re'z (= raise) 
re di 

re'rn M (= realm) 
re'zon 3, -z 1, cf. e § 11 
re'zonabl 3, cf. e § 11 
rescv, -d, -ing 
*remen OM 
*sents M 
*se', seing OM; seingz 0, 



se"d 0, sez 2, se*]? O-i, 

M; cf. e § 11 
se - vn 
se-vnf) M 2 (dot indistinct 

once) cf. e § 11 
/e-r M (= shear?) 
spe*k+, -ing+, cf. e § 11 
*ste' sb. 
*ste'd 1, ste'id 1 (ptc), ste*i{>, 

see p. 36 
ste-1 M 

te-t/1, te't/ing 2, cf. e § 11 
te-t/er 
*oVr [= their) +, M; -z 1, 

cf. er § 13 
de-r 2 (= there), cf. er § 13 
de-z OM 
*de* (— they) 
*trave , liug 1, cf. e § 12 
threziur 
*unfe - ned M 
*ve'n M (= vain) 
*ue' OM, ues 
ue\k M (= weak?) 
ue"r (= were) 
hue't (= wheat) 
huer+, cf. er >j 14 
huerin 1, cf. er § 14 
ie* M (= yea). 



For the words marked with * see p. 33ff. 



78 



Word-Lists. 



ii. e (short) stressed. 



afekt vb. 

agenst O 3, cf. e' § 10 

aledftd 

amend 

amendment 

apelativ 

assended M 

atempted 

be (/aulbe) 1 B, cf. r § 1 

being O 1 B, cf. r § 1 

benefits M 

best 

beter+, be'ter 1 C 

blesing 

blest M 

bred M 

brej) +, bredes 1, cf. e - § 10 

breded 2, bredd 1 A, 

cf. e- § 10 
komende]) 
komprehended 
konfes 
konsent 
kontented 
konvenientli B 
korekted 
koreksion 

korekter 1, korektor 1 (sb.) 
dez M 1 (= days) A, cf. e' 

§10 
ded M (= dead) 



dessended M 

direkting 

diskresion 

et/ uder 1, cf. e' § 10 

ez O 1 A, cf. e' (= ease) 

ester (= Easter) 

est-uind 

ezi 01, (ezzi M), (= easy), 

cf. § 10 
eftsu - n 
ekko M 
efekt 
eder 2 (= either), cf. e* 

§ 10 and p. 29 
elders 
element, -s 

els 

els-huer 

emperour O 2, emprour 1 

end, -ed, -e|), -ing 

indeuor (u B) 

end^in 

ennemi M, enemiez 1, eni- 
mies 1 

enterpreiz 

envi sb., envied 

espesialei 1 -siaulei 1 

ever 0+, evr M 

everlasting 0, evrlasting M 

everi 3, evri 2, M 

evident 



"Word-Lists. 



79 



evva M, eva (= ?) 
exseling (x B) 
eksept +, exept O 1 (x B) 
exsepting 1 , exepting 1 

M) 

exepsion (x B) 

exses (x B) 

exersrz, -ez, -ing (x B) 

eksodus M 

experiens (x B) 

experiment (x B) 

exprest (x B) 

ezzi M (= ? easy, see above) 

felu, -z, fehr, felo 

flerning 

fie/ 

fren/ 

djeneral 

djenera'sion M 

d^entl OM 

greter (= greater, ME. gretter) 

gres M (= ?) 

gresians 

hebriu +, -s, -z, cf. e' § 10 

bed (= head) 

helf) 

beb see § 44 

hebho M (= heigh-ho?) 

hel M 

help OM 

impresion 

enterliuds 



invented 

invension, -s 

inventors, -terz, -ters 

djeluz M 

djest 

kept 

ketl 

lest (= least) A? 

left adj. 

left ptc. 

leg 

lengj) 

les 

let OM 

leters O +, letters 1 B 

letred 

men, mens 

me 01 B, cf. §1, %2{=me) 

me 1 A or D (= may) 

ment 

medesin 

memori 

meusioned 

nesesari 

neder 3 (= neither), cf. e' 

§ 10, o § 27 
neOer (= Nether-) 
never 
neverdeles 

nekst 2, next O 1 B 
obedient B 

ut'flis 



80 



Word-Lists. 



ofended 

parenthezis 

pen 

pheni (= penny, see p. 13) 

peradventiur 

perfeksion 

plezd A, cf. e- § 10 

pleziur 

plentiful 

possessed M 

presept 

predesesors, -ours 

premisez 

present vb. 1, prezentedO 1 

present 1, prezent 1 

prezentlei 1, presentlei 1 

prodjenitors 

rezon +, -s 2 A, reson 

1 A B, cf. e- § 10 
rezonabl 2 A, cf. e" § 10 
remembrans 
remembr M 
reprezent M 
respect B 
rested M 
rezurreksion M 
rerend (= retained) A 
revend i 
rhetoric (rh B) 
sej) O 1, cf. e- § 10 
sekond O 1, sekund O 1 
sekondli 



seldum 

self OM, selvz M, selvs O 

semiuokals (u B) 

send OM, sent O 

sens 

sentens 

sepera - t, -ing 

set 

sevnfr M 1, cf. e 1 § 10 

several, severaul 

M 

spesiaul 

spek 1 (= speak) A, cf. e" 
§10 

spelerz 

streht, -er (= straight) 

subieksion (i B) 

sukses 

tet/ing 1 A, cf. e- § 10 

ten M 

tenses 

text (x B) 

3en + (= than) cf. a § 20 

de + very often shortened in- 
to d or 3' before vowels, 
see § 49 

dem OM 

den OM (= then) 

dens M 

6ez O + (== these) A, cf. e* § 10 

tugeder 

trespas, -passes M 



Word-Lists. 



81 



tuenti|) M 

uel|) 

uel adv. OM, uelneT 

uel sb. 

uent 

huen OM 

§ 12. 



huens 

hueder 

ureting 1 C, cf. ei § 15 

iet 

zat/eus M (= Zaccheus) 

zebed M. 



aksidents 

adherents (B?) 

afinite 

alegori 

alphabet {ph B?) 

emong 

emongst 4, amongst 1 

aunsient 

apostrophe (perhaps ph and 

e B) 
aphel (= apple, see p. 13) 
be- (cf. bi- § 3) 

bekums 

befoT 0+, Ml, cf. bi- 

begin, -ing, -e{>, began, 
cf. bi- 

behirf OM 

belongs 

bened M 

bestoed 

betuikst 1, betuixt i 
chamel 1, kamel 2 
kandel 1, kandl 1, chandl 1 
t/amlet (= camlet, see NED.) 

Jespersen, John Hart's Pronunciation 



e (short) unstressed. 

t/auncelour (c B) 

t/apel 

sichore (= chicory) 

komaund(e)ment, see above, 

p. 22, and p. 84 
kornodite 1, -ti 3, cf. dis- 
komprehended 
konvenientli 
kounsel vb and sb 
kountenans 
kuntreman 
kurtezi 
kuvet 
kuriozite 
de- (cf. di- § 3) 

dekla'r O, -d 0, -ing M 

defeind 

definieion 

delivr M 

derision 

deri'vd +, derivd 2 

dessended M 

dezeir 

dezeirous, -ruz, deziruz 



82 Word-Lists. 






deveided 


enkouradjed 




devi'zd 1, deveizd 2, 


ended 




deueizd 2 


envied 




dilidyent 


favored 




diskomodite 


figured 




-ed, cf. -d, -t §48: 


forsed 




akustuined 2, -md 3 


hallued M 




aded 


hoped 




advansed 


invented 




advertized 


lerned 4, lernd +, see 


aloued 


letred 


[§48 


aunsuered 


marked 




assended M 


mensioned 




asiured 


noted 




atempted 


observed 2, 


■vd 1 


bestoed 


okiupeied 1, 


-pied 1 


boroed 1, boroued 1 


ofended 




breded 2, bre'dd +, 


omited 




biuried M [bredd 1 


pe'nted 




kaused [s B, cf. z § 42) 


perfeited 




t/andyed 2, t/aungd 1 


persuaded 




seited [{g B) 


pla - sed 




kompounded 


possessed M 


B 


komprehended 


prezented 




kon founded 


printed 




konsidered, -dred 


provided B 




kontended 


rediused 




kontinued 1, -niued 1 


reformed 




korekted 


remembred 




dessended M 


repugned 




deveided 


rested M 




dubled 


riuled 





Word-Lists. 



83 



/eued 

sounded 

studied 

tasted 

treated 

trubled 

turned 2, turnd 1 

unfe'ned M 

unlerned 

vnsounded 
efekt 
eftsivn 
element, -s 
enkouradjed 
ennemi M, enemiez 1, eni- 

niies 1 
epistls 

-es (and ez), cf. -s und -z 
§ 42, § 43 : 

a'djes 

a//es M, a/es 

bredes B 1, bre'ds 3, 
bre'dz 1 

kauzes 

kontrariez 1, -ies 2 

kopies 

diferenses 

examples 1, -pis 1 

exersi'zez 

djudjes 

Iangadjes 

modes B 



mozez M 

nurses 

ofises 

pla'ses 

premisez 

prinses 

sprt/es 

tenses 

trespasses M 

veises 1, vises 1 

voises 
espesialei 1, -siaulei 1 
espeid 
-est: 

t/i-fest 

hardest 

iuzest 
-el) (cf. also § 41): 

abiuzeth (th for f) B) 

armej) 

begin e[j 

kaul<]> 

kauze]b 

kumejp 

koraendej) 

dout<]i 

endej) 

feinde|) 

loluv|, i, foluet) 3 

givef) M 

ll U It « | > 

indu'c}) M 



84 



Word-Lists. 



ma'kej) 

me*ne|) 

no"te|) 

prosi'deth (ih for £ B) 

resite|> 

served 

ta-ke|> 01, ta'kp Ml 

understandej) 

iuze|) 

ureitej) 
etimologi 1 (g B), -dji 2 
iven 1, rvn 2, ivn 1 
evident 
exampl, -pis, -pies 0, eksampl 

OM 
exseling 

eksept, exept, -ing, exseptiDg 
exepsion 
exses 
experiens 
experiment 
exprest 
extreTn 
florenteins 

forens (= foreign(er)s) 
harvest 

indifrentlei, indiferentli 
kno'ledj, knoledj 
-les : 

fe'|)les M 

giltles M 
medesin 



-ment: 

abridgment, -s 

advaunsment 

aduertizment (u B) 

amendment 

argument, -s 

komaundmentOl, -de- 
ment 1, kom- 
maundments M 2, 
see p. 22 

elements 

int/auntment 

experiment 

instrument, -s 
mihel (= Michael) 
mit/elmas 
mistres 
nesesari 
-nes and -nez 

briefnes 

forgivnes M 

leiknes M 

sui'tnes 

uitnez M 

UTdines 
neverdeles 
nikles (= Nicolas) 
nordren 
obedient 
opening 

palet (= palate) 
parenthezis 



Word-Lists. 



85 



pa'rents 

pekulier 

perfetlei, -li, cf. ei § 15 

precept 

predecesors, -ours 

preposisions 

present, prezent, see § 11 

prezentlei 1, pres- 1 

prezerving 

private B 

proses 

puppet M 

re- : 

recapitulat 

rese'v, -d. -ing 

resitej) 

reformasion 

refiu z 

regard 

rehers 

reme'n OM 

remember + 0, -bred 
1, -br M 

remembrans 

reprezent M 



repugned 

respect 

rezurreksion M 

retend 

re vend 5 
skrupelus 
sentens 

sepera't, -rating A 
serpent 
several, -aul 
simple 1 B, simpl 1 
skuirel M 
subiect (i B) 
suficient, -li -lei 
superfluite 
temta'sion M 
dem(selvs) 

traveler, cf. e' § 10 
trumpet M 
unserten 
unexpert 
verelei 
voel, -s, -z, generally written 

voel 
zebed M. 



§ 13- 



adherents B 
aduertizment [u B) 
serten, serte'n 
sertenlei 
t/eri, t/eritrr 



er stressed. 

divers,, deivere .">, diners 1 , 

deiuers 1 {u B) 
diverslei, deiverslei 
erb M :"), cf. 6' § 10 
er (= err) 



86 



Word-Lists. 



eror 1, erour 1 

experiens (B?) 

experiment 

djermain 

her 1, cf. i § 5 

herb 

lern 1, le'rn 1 

lernd+, lerned 1, cf. e - §10 

and § 48 
lerning 1, learning 1 (B) 
mersi M 
meri OM 

nerer (= nearer), cf. e" § 10 
observing, -ved, vd 
perfet + 
perfeited 1 
perfetli 1, -lei 3 
person, -s 



posteriti 
prezerving 
prosperiti 
rehers 
serpent 
servant M 
serv, -cl, -ej), -]i 
/ert (= shirt) 
superflirz, -fliuz 
unserten 
unexpert (x B) 
uniuersali (u B) 
unlerned 
verb, -s 
veri 

vertiu, -z (= virtue) 
vertiuz 1, verti'nz 1 
tuous). 



vir- 



adder M 

advertized 

after OM 

alter vb. 

anuder 

aunsuered 

beter 

bragger M 

beier (= buyer?) 

karter 

katerin (= Catherine) 



§ 14. er unstressed. 

(Cf. also § 47 syllabic r.) 

kauderon (= ca(u)ldroii) 
t/amberlain 
t/aunter 
t/apter 

t/ilder 0, t/ildrn M. 
choler 

konsider, -dered 1, -dred 1 
korrekter 1, -tor 1 (= cor- 
rector) 
korupter, -s 
kounter 



Word-Lists. 



87 



konterfet 

dagger M 

daund serous 

derivasions +, -tion 2 

diferens, -es 

difering 

dodjer (dodjdjer, double 5) M 

deier 

ester (= Easter) 

e*er M (= e'er for ever?) 

eder 1, e'der 3 (= either) 

elders 

elshuer 

ernperour 2, eroprour 1 

enterpreiz 

ever 

everlasting 0, evrlasting M 

everi 3, evri 2 

exersiz, -ez, -ing (x B) 

fader, fbrfaders O, fa'dr 

fa-dr M 
filbert M 
feier (= fire) 
former 
furder 
dgeneral 
d^enera'sion M 
giver O, givr M 
guvemurz 
gramer, -skirl 
greter 
hammer M 



harder 

he'rer 

hierafter, etc., see § 7 

heier (= higher) 

hinder 

hinderans 

histori-ureiters 

indiferentli 1, indifrentlei 1 

iner 

enterliuds 

inventerz 1, -ters 1, -tors 1 

dsugler M 

laborers 

ladder M 

later (= latter) 

le'rner 

leters+, letters 1 (cf. letred) 

longer 

mainte - ner 

maner OM, -s O 

marriner M 

mater, -z 

miter, miters 

miller M 

meicr (= mire sb.) M 

modern 

muder 3, muOr M 

misteri 

nerer (= nean r) 

ne'der 1, neOer 3 , noder 1 

(= neither) 
nedcr (in Nether-Dttich) 



Word-Lists. 



neuters 

never, -deles 

number 

observasion 

o'er M (= oar) 

order 

uder+, uders 1, u'der 1 

uderueiz 

otter M 

over 1 A, o*vr-it 1 

overmut/ A 

painter 

pa'per 

pertikuler 

pekulier 

peradventiur 1, peraduen- 

tiur 1 (u B) 
perse'v 
perfeksion 
persuaded 
persuazion 
ple'ers 

pouer, -s O, pou'er M 
printers 
proper 

piuer (= pure) 
quarter (q B) 
rader 
remember 
river 

sku-lma'sters 1, -masters 1 
sepera't, -rating 



several 1, -raul 2 
singuler, -lei 
sister, -s 
softer 
su*ner 
sprdier 
spelerz 

strand jers 0, strandjr M 
strehter 
suffer, -d M 
superfluite 

siuer 1, siur 2 (== sure) 
te-ty ei- 
der, ders (= their, theirs see 

below) 
3er (= there, see below) 
derbei + 

derfo-r O+Ml, 6erfor 2 
derin 1 
derof+ 

deruntu 1, deruntu - 1 
deruid 1, o*erui|) 1 
tugeder 
traveler 
under 
understand, -ing, -ef), -sto'd, 

-stird 
uniuersali B 
uper 

viuer (= viewer) 
ua'ter O, ua"tr M 
huer (see below) 



Word-Lists. 



89 



hueraz+, -as 1 hueruid 1, hueruij? Ml 

huerbei +, Ml hueder 

huerfoT O+Ml, -for 1 ureiter, cf. histori-ureiters 

huerin +, huerin 1 iorider. 

huerof+ 

I have hesitatingly given such compounds as there- 
fore, whereby as stressed on the last syllable; the constant 
use of the short vowel decidedly points in that direction. 
Similarly, when we find there written several times with 
a short vowel der, as against 6Vr (only twice), and where 
written huer (twice) as against hue*r (very often), the short 
vowels may belong to the unstressed forms, though in 
some cases I suspect a dot has been erroneously omitted. 
Their is generally written de'r, but der occurs twice (in 
weak position); theirs is once written 6Vrz, and once ders, 
which may be a misprint. 



15. ei. 



afein 

beier (= buyer?) 

bei OM (= by) 

seifring (= ciphering) 

seit, -ed (= cite) 

krusifeiing O, kriusifeid M 

defeind 

diskreibd 

dezeir 

dezeiruz 1 , -rous 1 , deziruz 1 B 

deveizd 2, deueidz 2 (u B), 

cf. r § 1. 
deivers 3, deiuers 1 B, cf. i 

§ 2. 



deiverslei 1, diverslei 1 

deveided 

dei (= dye) M 

deier (= dyer) 

enterpreiz 

espeid 

[exerseiz, see p. 28 

ei (= eye) 

feind -, feint taut 1, feindef) 

fcivt 2 (= fifth; in the old- 
spelling part it is written 
/;//, but fifthly) 

fei8r 

feiv 



90 



Word-Lists. 



florenteins 

hierbei 

heier (= higher) 

histori-ureiters 

ei OM (= I) 

eidllei (first I syllabic, = 

idly) 
inklein M 
kernel 

lei M (= lie down) 
leif OM 

leik+ (uel likt of 1) 
leiknes M 
lein 

leion M 
leivli 
-lei (= -ly, cf. -li § 3): 

boldlei 

sertenlei 

komodiuzlei 

komonlei 2, -li 1 

espesialei 1, -siaulei 1 

fitlei 1, -li 1 

indifreutlei 1, indife- 
rentli 1 

naTnlei 

partlei 

perfetlei 3, -li 1 

prezentlei 1, pres- 1 

riudlei 

singulerlei 

]?irdlei 1, -li 1 



J>rulei (= th(o)roughly) 

triulei 1, -li 2 

uniformlei 

verelei 

liuolei (= wholly) 
mankeind M 
rneind 
mein OM 
meier M (= mire) 
miseiv 
mei OM 
meiself 

okupeied 1, okupied 1 B 
uderueiz 
pasteim 
perfeited 

peilat M (= Pilate) 
peip OM (pheip 0, see p. 13) 
reid 

satisfei, -d 
seid 

sein (= sign sb.) 
signifei 1, -e|) 3, -ing 1, fi 1 C 
steil 
derbei 
dein 
dei OM 
3eiself M 
theirn (== thyme) 
teid (= tied) 
teim, -s 
[teitl, see p. 28] 



Word-Lists. 91 

treifls ueif M 

veises 1, vises IB (= vices) ueizdum 

huerbei OM ueiz adj. 

hueil M ueiz sb. 

hueilz, hueilst (= whiles, ureit+ OM, ureiting+, urei- 

ivhilst conj.) tef>, ureting 1 C 

huei OM (= why) ureiter, histori-ureiters. 

§ 16. ea - , ea. 

learning 1 B, cf. e* § 10, seas 1 B 

er § 13 treating +, -ted (B?) 

in de mea - n teim B treatis 2, -tiz 3, treasiz 1 

meaning 3 B, me*ning 1 (ea B?, -siz C). 

§ 17. eau. 
beautifi (-/? B) eaur (= ewer, a basin) OM. 

§ 18. eu. 

feu 1, fieu 1 (= few) /eu2,/eued +,/euing 1,/io' 1, 

neuters f'10 2 (== show) 

(zat/eus M). 

§ 19. a* (long), 

abl 1, cf. a § 20 and ha'bl. ka-k M 

a'djes ka'in 

-a'sion M, cf. -asion 0, see ka'pn 

§ 28 -ion. kar (= can) 

defeneration M t/andj 1, cf. a § 20, an 

temta*sion M § 25 

ba*d M (probably = bathe) kornpar, -s, -d 

bla'm david M 

bra'zn dekkrr, -d O, -ing M 



92 Word-Lists. 

fa-ar M 4, fa'dr M 2, fader na'm OM 

1, cf. for-faders na'rnd, na'nis, na'rnlei 

fa-Is M (= false) pad? 1, cf. a § 20 

fa'vor vb. 1, fa - vour sb. 1, pa'per 

cf. a § 20 paTents 

fra*m, -d, -ing pla's+, -es 2, cf. a § 20 

gam ra'dj M 

gaping ra'f M (= Ralph?) 

ga-ts M raT M 

ga'v sa - bl 

gra - s OM (= grace) sa'f M 

gra'v sa - d? 

habl (= able) sa-in OM 

ha-r M sa - v M 

ha't M sku*lma"sters 1, cf. a § 20 

ha-v 0+, M+, -ing 2, ha'f 1 seperat vb. 1, cf. a § 21 

(see p. 15), cf. a § 20 /a'm 

irnita*t /a'mfast 

la'br M, la-bur, -s O /a*p 1, -s+, -t 1, cf. a 

la-dl M spa-k OM 

la'di ta'bl 

la-m M tak OM, -ing O, -n 0, 

lat ta-kl> M 

ma'd OM (= made) ta'rt M (= tart?) 

mak OM, -e|> 0, cf. a §20 thams, th see p. 13 and 

ma-kr M § 44. 

ma'l M (= male) va - n M (= vane probably) 

liia'n M va-v M (=?) 

ma*r M ua'king 

ma"ri M (= Mary) ua'tr M, ua'ter 

(sku'ljraa'sters 1, cf. a § 20 ura*t (= wrate, wrote). 



Word-Lists. 



93 



a OM 

abba M 

abl 1 A, a-bl 1 

aksidents 

akorns A 

aktivz 

ad, aded 

adder M 

advansed, cf. au § 25 

advertized, cf. p. 25 

advoutri 

after OM, hierafter 

ahha M (= ?) 

alegori 

alphabet, ph see § 44 

also 1, aul- + 

alter 

alue-z 2, cf. aul- § 25, § 10 

am OM 

arripl 

an OM (before vowels; also 
once before w\ an irrdi 
man) 

analodji 

and always, in M and in 
biblical pieces, an in fami- 
liar style 

anna M 

ani OM 

aphel (= apjple, see p. 13) 



§ 20. a (short) stressed. 
Cf. § 22 ar. 

as, az, see § 42 

as (= ass) M 

a/, ayes O, a//es M 

asking 

at 

-asion, -azion 0, -a'sionM, see 

-ion § 28 
bab M 
bag 
bak 
began 
bragger 

kalumniators A 
chamel 1, kamel 2 
kan sb. 
kan vb. 

chandl 1, kandel 1, kandl 1 
kapital 
kastl 
kat 
kat/ 
katerin 
kaI)olik M 
katl M 
t/alk 

t./iunberlain (A?) 
t/a inlet (= camlet) 
t/and^d 2, t/andjed6, t/andg 

2, tyanging B 1, cf. au 

§ 25, ;r §19 



94 



Word-Lists. 



t/apel 

t/apter 

t/ast (A?) 

i/astizing 

kompanion 

komparison 1, -zon 2 

krab 

dab OM 

dad OM 

dagger M 

everlasting 0, evrlasting M 

eksampl 1 M 1, examples 

1, exampls 1, exampl 

02 
fader 1, for-faders 1, cf. 

a- § 19 
favored 1 A, cf. a- § 19 
gag M 
gladli 

gramer, gramer-skirl 
gravn M A 
had 

hah OM, cf. § 44 
half 

hammer M 
hand OM 
hapn 

hast {thou) M 
hat M 
ha|) 
having 1, hauing IB. cf. 

a- § 19 



italian 

djak (= Jack) 

laborers A 

lak 

lad 

ladder M 

lam M (= lamb) 

land M 

langadj, -es 

las M 

last adj. 

lasting (ever- 0, evr- M) 

latin, -s 

later (= latter) 

making 2 A, cf. a' § 19 

man, manz 

maner OM, maners 

mani OM, manni M 

mas 

(skvrl)masters, cf. a' § 19 

mater, -z 

misplasing A 

natural 

natiur A? 

not-uid-standing 

pads 1 A, cf. a* § 19 

palet (= palate) 

pap OM 

pas, -ing, past 

pasteim 

pat/ 

persuaded A 



Word-Lists. 



95 



plases 1 A, cf. a* § 19 and 

mis- 
prat 

kuantiti 1, -tie 1 B, -tiz 1 
radikaul 
ran M 
ra/ M 
rader 
sabbot M 
salt 
sathan 
satisfei, -d 

sku'lmasters 1, -masters 1 
/al 1, cf. au 
/a'mfast 

/aps 1 A, cf. a* § 19 
fmf M 
Spaniard 
spani/ 
stand, see not-uid-standing, 

under- 



strandj, -li (A?) 

strandjr M, strandjers (A?) 

tasted A 

dan cf. e § 11 

fcankful OM 

fianks M 

dat OM 

transitori 

translating A 

traveler, traveling 

uag M 

uant 0, -s M 

ual/ (= Welsh) 

uaz, uas, cf. z § 42 

ua/ 

uat OM (= Wat, Walter) 

huat OM, huat-so-ever, sum- 

huat (once by misprint 

hut) 
hueraz+, -as 1 
zakari. 



§21. a (short) unstressed. 
Cf. § 23 ar. 

akue'ntans 

akiut 

adherents 

advansed 

advaunsment 

aduertizment (u !'>) 

afekt 

afein 



abu'v +, abo*v 1 B, abuv 

03 Ml 
abridgment, -s 
abius 

abiuz, -d, -eth 
akording, -li 
akount 
akustumed, -md 



96 



Word-Lists. 



afinite 

afirmd 

agen OM 

agenst 1 M, agenst + 

-al, cf. -aul § 25 

kapital 

kontiniual 

espesialei 1, -siaulei 1 

d general 

natural 

oridjinal 

plurali 

semiuokals (u B) 

several O 1 

uniuersali (u B) 
aledjd 
alou, -ed 
aliud 

almihti Ml, cf. aul- § 25 
alon OM 
alphabet (ph § 44) 
amend 

amongst 1, cf. e § 12 
anuder 
analodp 

apir, -d 0, apprring M 
apelativ 
apostrophe 
apro t/ 
ariht 

assended M 
aspiration 1 (t B), -asion 1 



aspi'r, -d, -ing 

asiurans 

asiured 

aten 

atempted 

aue* (= away) 

bondadj M 

kalumniators 

kariadj 

kavilalasions C 

koma 

konsonant, -s 

kountenans 

kuntreman 

diskuradjings 

distans 

dut/land 

enkourad^ed (on B) 

ingland 

evva M, eva 

gama 

gramarian 

gresians 

hinderans 

ignorant 

imad3 M 

italian 

langadj, -es 

-man: noblman 1, -mans 1, 

noblman 1, u'uman M 
mankeind M [mas 1 

-mas: michaelmas 1, mit/el- 







Word 


-Lists. 


no'tabl 






seperating 1, cf. a - § 19 


oratof, -s 






servant M 


orthographi, 


cf. 


§ 44 


silabl, -s 


peradventiur 


1, 


peraduen- 


thomas, cf. § 44 


tiur 1 B 






J)Ousandz M 


peilat M (= 


Pilate) 


tiladj 


ple"zant 






translating 


private B 






tbriakl, cf. § 44 


re'zonabl 3, 


rez- 


1 A 


trespas M, -ses M 


rekapitulat 






u'uman M 


remembrans 






zat/eus M (= Zaccheus). 


sathan, cf. § 


44 










§ 22. ar 


stressed. 


ar (= are) OM 




hard, -er, -est 


argument 






hark 


arm M 






harm 


armej) 






harri M (= Harry) 


art sb. 






hart (= heart) 


art (thou) M 






harvest 


artikl 






lard j, -li 


kariads 






mark, -s, -ed 


kart 






mari M (exclamation) 


karter 






marri M (verb) 


t/arko'l 






marriner M 


t/ariot 






part, -s, -lei 


tyart 






quarter (q B) 


dark 






regard 


distyardj 






/arp 


far OM 






vari A? 


forpart 






uarning 


gramarian A 


.? 




(t/urt/-)iard. 


Jespersen , 


John 


Hart's Pronunciation. 7 



97 



98 


Word-Lists. 


§ 23- 


ar 


unstressed. 


kontrari, -ez, -es, -ueiz 




tvrards 


doun-uard 




Spaniard 


in-uard 




vizard M 


nesesari 




vulgar 


parenthezis 




zakari M. 


rit/ard M 






§ 


24. 


ai, ae. 


auluai Ol, -s 1, cf. e 1 


§11 


mainte'ner 


t/arnberlain 




painter 2, cf. e' § 10 


aeht|> (= eighth) 




rornain -s (— Boman) 


djermain (— German) 




See above, p. 36. 



9 25. 

advaunsment 1, cf. a § 20 

aul OM 

-aul: radikaul, cf. -al § 21, 

severaul 2, spesiaul 
-aulei: espesiaulei 1, -sialei 1 
aulmihti 1 M 2, al- M 1 
aulso 0+, cf. a § 20 
aulJ)oh 
aulue - z + M, alue'z 2, 

auluais 1, auluai 1 
aunsient 
aunsuered 

autours 1, autor 3, author 1 
autoritiz 

baul M (= ball or batvl?) 
bikauz+, bikaus 2 
kaul, -el), -d 
kauderon (= cauldron) 



au. 

kauz 0+, -es, -e]?, kaused 

t/auncelour (c B) 

t/aundler 

t/aund? 01M, t/aung 1 B, 

t/aungd O 1 (g B), cf. a 

§ 20, a- § 19 
t/aunter 
komaund 
kornaundment O 1, kom- 

maundments M 2, kornaun- 

dement O 1, see p. 22 
daund serous 
dauhtr M 
int/auntment 
faul 

faut 2, faultz 1 B 
gaul (= gall) 
lauh M, lauht 2, lauhing 



Word-Lists. 



99 



lau OM, lauz M 

lauful 

sau (= saiv, past tense) 

shaul + M+, cf. a ; shault M+ 



smaul 

tauht 1, taught 1 B 

uaul M (= wall). 



§ 26. o- (long). 
The words marked * in § 26 and 27 have [o'u], see p. 34ff. 
abo'v 1 B, cf. ir § 34, u § 35 hier-befcrr+, -bifoT 1 



ho"m M 

ho - p 1, hoped 1 A 

ho-z OM 

*kno" 1, knon 1, kno + 



alo-n OM 

apro't/ 

befo-r 0+ M 1, bifoT 1, 

M 1, befor-se-d 1 
born (ov 9e virdjin) M, cf. *kno'ledj+, knoledj 1 

or § 30 mo-r 'OM 

bo*r' 2 (= borroiv, before a no'blman 1, noblman 1 A, 

vowel), cf. or § 30 noblmans 1 A 

bo-9 0+ Ml, bod 0+ (A?) no'n OM, absolute and be- 



(= both) 
bro'd, bro'der (= broad) 
*t/arkol 
klo*s adj. 
*ko'l 

*ko , lu , rts (= coleworts) 
dor 

felo- 1, cf. ir § 34, u § 36 
fo'rs vb. 1, cf. or § 30 
fo-rpart 

fo'rse*d 1, -sed 1 
fo'rtrj) (= foreteeth) 
go- 

go'st M 
*gro" 



fore vowels (0: no*n efekt; 

M: no'n udr godz) 
no"z M 
no'tabl 
no't sb. 

no't vb. 2, no'tej? 1, noted + A 
o- M 

o'er M (= oar) 
o'ns (= once) 
o'n (= one) 
onli 0+, onli +, uonli M 

§ 39 
()•[)] ten (= open, see p. 13) 

OpO'Z 

o'vr-ii 1, over 1, overmuV l 



100 



Word-Lists. 



purpo'zd derfo'r + M 1, derfor 1 A 

roT M (== roar?) 6Vz 

rom (= Rome), cf. roman thro"n (= throne) 



§ 27 
*ro* M (= row in a boat) 
ro'z M vb. 
seiniuo'kals (u B) 
,/ot OM 

*/io- 1, /io 2, cf. eu § 18 
sot M {= sore) 
spo'kn 



to'kn 

understo'd 1 B, -stvrd 2 

unspo - kn 

huerfoT + Ml, huerfor 

01 A 
ho-1 2, huo-1 3 (= ivhole), 

cf. uo- § 39 
huo*z 1, huoz 3; cf. uo' § 39. 



emong 

emongst 4, amongst 1 

apostrophe 

belongs 

*bestoed 

bi-iond 

bodi 2, bodi- 1, boddi M 

*boldlei 

bondadj M 

boro, boroed, cf. ou § 33 

bod +, cf. o- § 26 

choler 

chronikl 

koma 

komodious A? 

koraodiuzlei A? 

komodite 1, -ti 3 

komon 

komonli 1, -lei 2 



27. o (short) stressed. 
kompozd A 



kompounds 

konsonants +, consonants 1 B 

kontrari, -riez, -ries 

kontrariueiz 

kopi, kopies 

konterfet, cf. ou § 33 

krop 

kros 

kuriozite 

diskomodite 

dodger M (two letters for dj, 

as if dodjdjer) 
etimolodji 2, -logi 1 B 
folio A? 
folo 1, folu 1, foloing 1, 

foluing +, foluej) 3, folu*e|) 1 
fro, cf. p. 17, 18 
from OM 



Word-Lists. 



101 



glori M 2 

god OM, godz M 

gotn 

hierof 

holli M 5 (= holy) 

hoped 1 A, ho - p 1 

onor M, honor OM 

djon 

*kno + A, kno* 1, kno*n + 

^knoledj 2, kno"ledj + 

long OM, longer O 

niiskonstrmng 

modes (= moods in gram- 
mar) B 

modern 

most+ A? 

mosion A 

mozez M A 

*noder 1, neder 3, ne'der 1 
(= neither) 

no 0+ M + 

nohlman 2 A, noblman 1 

not OM 

noted + A, cf. o - § 2G 

noting 3 

notuidstanding 

o, oh M (oh mein 0"un 
lam ... o mein o*un man) 

okupeied 1, okupied 1 

of + M 2, ov O + M 3, D, 
see p. 16 

ofis, ofises 



oftn 

*old+, see p. 35 

on M 

onli 0+, o-nli 0+, uonli M 

opening A 

orthographi 

otter M 

over 1, o'vr-it 1 

overmuty 

oks M 

polz t/urt/-iard 

pons M (= Ponce Pilate) 

proses 

profit 

pronounz sb. pi. (with the 

mark of shortness on first o) 
proper 

*ro M (= row?, cf. o" § 26) 
romain, -s (= Roman, cf. 

ro - m § 26) 
skoti/ 
7'io 2, /o M 3, cf. o- § 26, 

eu § 18 
*slobful 

so OM, A or E 
soft, -er 
softli 

somhuat 1 B, cf. u §35 
stoping 
derof 
thomas 
to 2B, see u § 35 and § 50 



102 



unposibl 

upon OM 

vo'is 3, vo-'is M 1, voises 

0+, voises 1 
*voel 1 , voelz 1 , voel +, voels +, 

voelz + (= vowel) 



Word-Lists. 

huerof 



huo +, huom 3, huoz 3, 

huoz 1 (= ivho, etc.) 
huolei (= wholly) 
ionder. 



§ 28 

aulso +, also 1 

analodji 

apostrophe 

-a(')sion, etc., see -ion below 

boro 1, boroed 1, cf. ou § 33 

kaJ)olik M 

kauderon (= cauldron) 

t/ariot 

kornaund 

komaundment 1, kom- 

maundments M 2, komaun- 

dement 01 p. 22 
komende|) 
kommit M 
komodious 
koinodiuzlei 
komoditi 3, -te 1 
komon 

komonlei 2, -li 1 
komrnunion M 
kompaT, -s, -d 
koraparison 1, -zon 2 
kompozd 
kompounded 



o (short) unstressed. 

komprehended 

konse'vd M 

konfes 

konfirmasion 

konfounded, -ding 

kondjunksion 

konsent 

konsider, -dered, -dred 

konsonants+, con- 1 B 

konstre'n, -d 

konte'nd 

kontented 

kontiniual 

kontiniu 2, -niued 1, -nued 1 

konvenientli 

diskomodite 

ekko M 

etirnolodji, -logi B 

eksodus M 

folio A 

folo 1, foloi'ng 1, cf. u § 36 

hehho M (= heigho) 

-ion: 

aspirasion A, -ation AB 



Word-Lists. 



103 



kavilalasions AC 

kommunion M 

kompanion 

konfirmasion A 

kondjunksion 

koreksion 

defmision 

derision 

derivasions +, -tion 2 AB 

diminusion 

diskresion 

exepsion 

foundasion A 

dgenera^sion M 

impresion 

institusions 

instruksion, -s 

invension, -s 

mensioned 

mosion A 

nasion, -s A 

observasion A 

okazion A 

opinion 

perfeksion 

persuazion A 

preposisions 

pronunsiasion A 

proportion 

reform asion A 

rezurreksion 

subieksion (i B) 



temta'sion M 

uzurpasion A 
leion M 
moro M 
notoriuzli A? 
obedient (B?) 
obe* 

observasion A 
observed, -vd, -ving 
obte'nd 
okazion A 
ofens 
ofended 
omited 
opinion 
opoz 
person, -s 
possessed M B 
posteriti 
preposisions 
prosi'deth (th B) 
prodgenitors 
pronouns +, pronuns 1 (= 

pronomice) 
pronunsiasion 
proporsion 
prosperiti 
provided 

purpoz sb., cf. o- § 26 
rezon + A, -s 2 A, re'zon 3, 

reson 1 
re'zonabl 3, rezonabl 2 A 



104 


Word-Lists. 




rhetorik 


sekond 1, 


-und 2 


sabbot (= 


sabbath) sekondli. 
§ 29. oh, ouh. 





aulI>oh 1 oht 2, ouht 2 (= ought, vb. 

broht 04, brouht 1, brouht souht 

M 1 j,oht 

noht (= nought, naught) doh + 
oh, M, see p. 101 See above p. 35. 



§ 30. 

akording 

akordingli 

akorns 

alegori 

autor 3, author 1, autours 1 

autoritiz 

born (de t/ild born), cf. <r 

§ 26 
boro 1, boroed 1, boroued 1, 

dot' 2 
kalumniators 
sichore (= chicory) 
korekted 
koreksion 
korekter 1, korektor 1 (= 

corrector) 
korupter, -s (= corruptor) 
korupting 
disorder 
disordring 
indeuor (u B) 



or. 

eror 1, erour 1 

fa'vor vb. 1 (sb. favour 1), 
favored 1 A 

florenteins 

for OM 

forsed 1 A, cf. o- § 26 

forens (= foreigns, foreig- 
ners) 

for-faders A, cf. o - in fore- 
said &c. 

forgiv M 

forgivnes M 

former 

forj) 1, cf. ur § 37 (= forth) 

forfc M (= fourth), cf. ou' 
§ 33 

d3ordj OM 

glori 2 M (A ?) 

histori-ureiters 

honor 1, M 1, onor M 1 

horn M 



Word-Lists. 



105 



ignorant 

inventors 1, -terz 1, -ters 1 

ivori 

laborers, cf. r § 47 

lord M, lords OM 

rnernori 

moro M 

nor OM 

nordren 

notoriuzli 

or OM 

orator, -s 

order 

oridjinal 

orthographi 

predesesors 2, -sours 1 



prod^enitors 
proporsion 

reformasion 

reformed 

rhetorik 

skorn 

/ort 

/ortli 

sort 

]?om (name of letter) 

transitori 

tiutors 1, tutors 1 

uniform 

uniformlei 

huerfor 1 A, -fo - r + M 1 

irorld, see p. 7. 



§31. 

t/bis 

hois ( f hois the sayle') M 

oister M 

point 



o - i, OK 

voises+, voises 1, vo'is 3, 
vo-i's M 1 

Cf. join under iu § 9. 



§ 32. o-u. 

bou M fto shoote with') moul M (= mole) 
boul (dish) M 
bro-uht M, cf. § 29 
ho'u M (exclamation) 
ho'uld M 



oun M 3, cf. ou § 33 
sou M ('to so-u a Beam, or 

corn) 
so"ul fa shooe so - ul") M 



mo'u ("to mo'u the grasse') M so'ulz M (= souls). 

This notation is found in M only, see above p. 34 ff. 



106 



Word-Lists. 



§ 33- 
akount 
advontri M 
alou, -ed 

autours 1, -tor 3, -thor 1 
boul ('an alley boul') M 
bound 
boroued 1, boroed 1, boro 1, 

bo-r' 2 
bou M ( c of a tree') 
brouht Ol,broht 3, 

bro-uht M 
t/auncelour (c B) 
komodious 1, -diuzlei 1 
kompounded 
kompounds 
konfounded, -ding 
kounsel sb. & vb. 
kountenans 
kounter adj. 
daund-jerous 
dezeirous 1, -ruz 1, deziruz 

1 (• B) 
dout sb. 
dout vb., -ej) 
doun M 
doun-uard 

emperour 2, ernprour 1 
enkourad-jed B 
erour 1, eror 1 
fa'vour sb., cf. § 30 or 
flouT (= wheat flour) 



oir, ou. 

foul M 

found 

foundasion 

fou'r (= four) 

fouTj) 0, for|) M (= fourth) 

ground 

hound 

hous M 

hou OM 

houb'i't (= hoivbeit) 

rnou ( c a mou of corne') M 

(= mow, OE. mxigd) 
mouj) 
noun 
nou OM 

our OM, -s O (= our, ours) 
out OM 

oun (= own), cf. o*u § 32 
pound 

pou - r' (= imir) 
pouer 0, pou'er M 
predesesours 1, -sors 1 
pronounz pi. 
pronouns § 28 
round 

sou M ('pig') 
souht 

sound, -s sb. 
sound vb., -ed, -ing 
dou M 
J)ousandz M 



Word-Lists. 



107 



tout/irjg +, tout/t 1 B?, 
tut/ing 1 

t0UT 



vnsounded (v B) 
uidout 0, uiddout M. 



§ 34. ir (long). 
[Words in with u* and in M with iru = wu, see § 35.] 
abu'v +, abo'v 1 B, abu'vsed u'dr M (= other), cf. u § 35 



3, abuvse'd 3, abuvuritn 

1, abuv M 
behirf OM 
bu - k +, -s +, buk 1 
kukku- M 
diskuTs 
du- 0+ M+, du 03E, dim 

0+ Ml, dun 2, du|) 

2, duf) 0+, dud 0+, 

d' understand 1 
eftsu'n 

felu- 1, cf. u § 36, o § 28 
fohre|) 1, foluing 1, cf. u 

§ 36, o § 28 
fu'li/ 

gu'd 4, gud + 
gramersku'l 
indued M 
hrv OM (= love) 
mirdr M, muder 3 (== 

mother) 



pnrv 3, pruvd 1 A 
pirr M 
rut (= root) 

skuima'sters 1, -masters 1 
(under)stu-d see below 
su - n, -er 

SU*J) 

superflu'z 2, -fliuz 2 
triu* 1, see § 9 
tu- M 1 (= to), cf. u § 35 
nrk 1, tuk 1 
derunur 1, -tu 1 
nrards (= toivards) 
tu - (= two) 

undersurd 2, -sto'd 1 B 
untu- M 

vertiu - z 1, vertiuz 1 (^ vir- 
tuous), see § 9 
hr, cf. iu § 9 and p. 48. 



§ 35. u (short) stressed. 
Cf. § 37 ur. 
abuv OM, see § 34 anu3er 

akustumd 3, -med 2 argument, -s, see p. 33 



108 



Word -Lists. 



bekums 

bigun 

buk 1, birk +, bu'ks + 

but OM 

kalumniators 

kum OM, kumej) 

koininunion M B? p. 33 

kondjunksion 

korupter, -s 

korupting 

kuld 

kuntre" 

kuntreman 

kuvet M (= covet) 

krusifeiing, cf. § 9 

kukkir M 

kustum 

cut B 

dirninusion B? p. 33 

du 3 D, cf. u* § 34; also 

d'understand 
dun 2, du'n + 
duj>+, dud+, du-|) 2 D, 

dut|) (t B) 
dubl 
dubled 
drum M 

dut/ 
dut/land 

ful 

gud +, gud 4 

guvernurz 



gumz 

hier-under 

institusions, see p. 33 

instruksion, -s 

instruments, see p. 28 

djudjM, iudjOB, d-judjesO 

djugler M 

djust 

muder 3, mu"dr M 

muht (= mought, might) 

mutf +, mit/; cf. mikl § 2 

multitiud 

muzik B? p. 33 

must 

number 

numbring 

uder +, uders 1 , uder 

1, u-der 1, M 
uderueiz 
overmut/ 
pekulier B? p. 33 
phlum (= plum, see p. 13) 
pronuns 1C?, -nouns + (= 

pronounce) 
pronunsiasion 
pruvd 1 A, cf. ir § 34 
puppet M 
put, puting 
repugned 

ruff in (probably C = rushing) 
skrupelus B? p. 33 
,/uld (= should) 



Word-Lists. 



109 



sum 

sumhuat +, somhuat 1 B 

sun (= son) M 

studi sb. 

studied 

subiekt (i B) 

suty OM 

suffer, -d M 

superfluite B? p. 33 

|)ru 1, ftruh 1 (= through) A? 

|)rulei (= throughly, tho- 
roughly) A? 

|>rust, -ing 

dus OM 

tu 0+ M+, tu- Ml, to 2, 
t' see § 50 

tuug, -s 

tut/ing, cf. ou § 33 

trubl sb. 

trubled 

trumpet M 



trust 

thuni (= tunny) 

tutors IB?, tiutors 1 

tutti M 

un-, see § 36 

under +, undr M 2 

uniform B p. 33 

uniformlei B p. 33 

up 

uper 

us + M +, uz 01 M 3 

vulgar 

hut 1 C (for huat, what) 

hut/ 2 C (for hint/, which) 

uld +, u'ld 1 (i.e. wuld = 

would) 
u'uman (i.e. wuman) M 
u'ndring (i.e. wundring) 
u - nt (i.e. wunt = wont adj. 
iung. 



§ 36. u (short) unstressed. 

Cf. § 37 ur. 



akustumd 1, -med 2 

argument, -s, see p. 33 

komodiuzlei, cf. ou § 33 

kuriuz 

kustum 

dezeiruz 1, deziruz 1 B, 

dezeirous 1 
eksodus M 



felu3, feluz3, felu'l, felo'l 
folu 1, folue|) 3, foluing . 
fohre|) 1, folo 1, foloing 1 
halued M 2 
instruments, see p. 33 
intu + M 3 
djeluz M 
dje*zus M 



110 



Word-Lists. 



kingdum M 

lauful 

miskonstruing 

nrdful 

notoriuzli 

okupeied 1, -pied 1 [i B) 

pertikuler 

plentiful 

rekapitulat 

skrupelus 

sekund 2, sekond 1 

seldum 

singuler 

singulerlei 

slopful 

subieksion (i B) 

sukses 

sufisient 

sufisientli 2, -lei 3 

superfluite 

superfhrz 2, -fliuz 2 

pankful OM 



§ 37- 
t/urt/ OM 
t/urt/-iard 

koiuTts (i.e. ko'lwurts = 

colcivorts) 
(kuradj, in diskuradjings, 

enkouradjed) 
kurtezi 
kuriuz B? (p. 33) 



deruntu" 1, -tu 1 

tugeder 

unserten 

understand, -ing, -e|), -sto'd 

1, -stu'd 2 
undiskri't 
unexpert (x B) 
unfe*ned M 
uniuersali (u B) 
unlerned 
unposibl 
unprikt 

vnsounded (v B) 
unspo'kn 
until 

untu 3, untu- M2 
unuritn 
upon OM 
uzurp 
uzurpasion 
ueizdum 
zat/eus M. 

ur. 

kuriozite B? 
diskurad jings 
figured (B? p. 33) 
fur J) + M, furth 01 B, 

fori) 1 
furder 



guvernurz 
hurt, -ep 



Word-Lists. HI 

la -bur, -s 0, la-br M turn, -d 1, -ed 2, -ing 

murdr M uzurp 

natural uzurpasion 

ne'hbur, -z M urd 1, urd +, urds + (i.e. 

nurs, -es wurd, -s) 

plurali B? (p. 33) urk, uTks (i.e. wurk, wurks) 

purpoz sb. irur/ip (i.e. wur/ip) M 

purpo'zd u'rdines (i.e. wurdines) 

rezurreksion M u*rdi (i.e. wurdi). 

§ 38. uc, uei. 

bue' 3 (= boy) hueiz (= hoy, M. Dutch hoei 

buei (= buoy) OM c a small vessel') OM. 

These words occur in the specimen phrase "bi ueiz 
ov de hueiz buei" = be ivise of the hoyes boivy, as Hart 
himself transliterates it in the usual spelling; uei then 
seems to mean the same combination of sounds as in ueiz 
= wise (cf. also hueilz = ivhilcs). In M the same example 
is repeated: "hoyes boy should be written ... hueiz buei." 
With regard to the curious pronunciation of boy = bue' 
it is worthy of note that in his manuscript (leaf 26 b ) 
Hart wrote the word buay (in what was intended to be 
standard spelling), but in the old-spelling part of O the 
word is written Boy (twice on p. 19 b , once on p. 20"). 

§ 39. ucv, uo, uoa. 
uonli M (= only), cf. o*, huoz 3, huo'z 1 (= whose). 
huo (= who) uoad (to dei bliu\ the doth 

huol 3, hoi 2 (= whole) is uoaded) M, given as 

huolei (= wholly) example of a triphthong. 

huom OM (= whom) 



112 



Word-Lists. 



§ 40. 
advertized (cf. aduertizment) 
anuder 
bad M 

bo-d 0+ Ml, bod + 
bre'ds 3, bre'dz 1, bredes 

1 C, sb. pi. 
bre'd vb. 2, bre"dd+, breded 

1 A, bredd 1 A 
brrdrn M (= brethren) 
dud +, cf. J) § 41 
fader 1, fa'dr M 4, fa'dr 

M2 
forfaders 

furder (comparative) 
muder O 3, roudr M 1 
murdr M 
ne'der 1, neder 3, noder 1 

(= neither) 
neder 2 (= nether [Dutch]) 
u ever deles 
nordren 

not-uid-standing 
uder +, uders 1, u'der 

01, uder 1, irdr M 
rader 
se*d 1 (may be for se'd, 

probably for se"{), cf. dud) 
den +, dan 1 (= modern 

than) 
dat OM 
de, d' or d. In M the rule 



is carried through that de 
is used before consonants 
(including h) and d before 
vowels. As for see § 49 

der + M, der O 3 A (= 
their) 

deTz 1, ders 1 AB 

dem OM 

den OM 

dens M 

de'r 2, der +D (= there) 

derbei 

derfo'r 0M+, -for 2 

derm 

derof 

deruntu' 1, -tu 1 

deruid 1, -ui{) 1 

de-z 0M+, dez 

de* (= they) 

dein 

midinks 1 C?, cf. £ § 41 

dird 1 C, cf. J) § 41 

dis OM +, diz OM +, cf. § 42 

dou M 

doh, cf. aul|)oh 

dus OM 

dei OM 

hueruid 

hueder 

uid +, cf. J), ui' d'artikl 1, 
ui' de 1 



Word-Lists. 



113 



ui6in OM 

uidout 0, uiddout M 

§ 41- 
Cf. -el> 

aulfroh, cf. doh 

brej> +, bre*|) + sb., cf. 9 

§40 
de*|) 

diph|)ongs +, -thong + 
duf) +, du-|> 2, duo* + 
erfr M 2, e'rj) M 1 
aehtj) (= e^A) 
feiv|) 2 (= fifth) 
fo'rti"|) (= foreteeth) 
for|) 01, furj) + M 1, furth 

1 B (= forth) 
fou-rf) 1, fori) M 1 

(= fourth) 
fril> M 
hal) 
he'l) 
hell) M 
lengj) 
moul) 
noting 
se*l) 0+ M 1, sel> 1, se'9 

01 
se'vnl) M 2, sevnl) M 1 
sit]) M 
slol)ful 

For th see § 44. 



uTdines (i.e. wur-) 
uvrch' (i.e. wur-). 

§12. 
smil) M 

SU'l) 

steil) (= stayeth) 
ta-kl) M 1, ta-kel) 1 
ti'l) 

l)ankful 
deruil) 1, -uid 
J>ik OM 

l>i-f M 1, thi-f 1 B 
l>imbl M 
l)in OM 
ting, -s 

l)ink +, mil)inks 1, midinks 1 
l>ird 1 M 1, dird 1 
l)irdli 1, -lei 1 
l)orn (name of letter) 
l)oht +vb. 
!>rr OM 
J>ruh 1, Jtru 1 
l)rulei 
l)rust, -ing 
uell) 

hueruil) M 1, -uid 01 
uil> + chiefly before voice- 
less sounds, uid + 
iu{) (= youth). 



Jesperscn, John Hart's Pronunciation. 



114 



Word-Lists. 



§42. 

abiuz +vb., -d+, -eth 1 

aktivz 

advertized 

aduertizment 

aulue'z + M, alue'z O 2, 

auluais 1 B 
az 4 (az de, az uel, az 

na'mli, az iu), as 0+; az 

M5 (before vowels and 

voiced cons.); as not found 

in M 
autoritiz 
bikauz + bikaus 2 (b. de, 

b. sum) 
bra*zn 
bre'dz 1, bre'ds 3, bredes 1 

sb. pi. 
kauz 4, -e]p 1, -es 1, kaused 

IB 
t/astizing 
t/i-z 

komodiuzlei, cf. s § 43 
komparizon 2, -son 1 
kompozd 

kontrariez 1, -ies 2 
kontrariueiz 
kuriuz 
kuriozite 

dez 3 M 2, dez M 1A 
dezeir 



z. 

dezeiruz 1, -rous 1, dezi- 
ruz 1 

devrzdl, deveizd2, deueizd2 

enemiez ov . . eniniies tu 

e'rz (= ears) 

e*zd 1, ez 1A (= ease vb.) 

e'zili 

e'zi 2, ezi 1 

ezzi M (= easy ??) 

enterpreiz 

exersi'z, -ez, -ing, cf. p. 28 

faultz C 

feluz 

godz M gen. 

guvernurz 

gumz 

hebriuz 1, hebrius 1 

hiz O +, his + chiefly before 
voiceless consonants; M 
hiz 7 before voiced conso- 
nants and 3 before vowels, 
his 2 before voiceless con- 
sonants and 1 before a 
pause (1 his before a 
vowel corrected to hiz in 
second impression) 

ho-z OM 

hueiz OM (= hoy's) 

inventors first . . inventerz 
ov, in venters of 



Word-Lists. 



115 



iz 0+, is 2 (is piuer, is 
sed); iz M2 before vowels, 
1 before h, 1 before a 
voiced consonant, 1 before 
a pause; is M 1 before a 
pause 

djeluz M 

lauz M 

manz 

materz 

muzik 

nehburz M 

no - z M 

notoriuzli 

okazion 

opoz 

ourz 1, ours 2 

pe'rz +, pe*rs 3 

parenthezis 

polz {= Paul's) 

persuazion 

ple'zant 

plez 2 (= please), plezd 1 

pleziur 

premisez 

prezent 1, present 1 adj. B 

prezented 1, present 2 vb. B 

prezentlei 1, pres- 1 

prezerving 

pronounz sb. pi. 

purpoz sb. 

purpo'zd 



kuantitiz 

re'z (= raise) 

re'zon 3, rezon + A, rezons 
1 A?, reson 1 

re'zonabl 3, rezonabl 2 A? 

refiuz sb. 

reprezent M 

riulz sb. pi. 

se - z 2 (= says) 

seingz 

selvz M, selvs 

sinz M 

so'ulz M 

spelerz 

superfiu'z 2, -fliuz 2 

de - rz 1, cters 1 

dez 0+, dez 0+ A?; in M 
de'z 2, in one of these 
de"s was corrected into 
the'z in the second im- 
pression (= these) 

3is +, diz + chiefly before 
voiced sounds; 3iz M 2 
before voiced consonants 

|)Ousandz M 

thre"ziur 

treatiz 4, treatis 2, treasiz 
1C 

uz 01 (uz aul), us 0+; in 
M uz 2 before voiced cons, 
and 1 before a vowel; us 
3 before voiceless cons., 

8* 



116 



Word-Lists. 



1 before h, 4 before a 
pause and 1 (B) before a 
voiced cons. 

iuz vb., -est, -e{), -d, -ing; 
thus also in "ar iuzd tu 
b'aspi'rd"; "ui iuz tu 
bre*d"; "du aulso iuz tu 
sound" 

iuz sb. 1 C, ius 4; in the 
plural Hart says that s is 
turned into z 

uzurp 

uzurpasion 

vertiuz sb. pi. 

vertiuz 1, -tiu'z 1 (= virtuous) 



voelz +, voelz 1, voels + 
uaz +, uas 1 (before w-), 

uas M 2 before voiceless 

cons, 
hueraz +, -as 1 
hueilz (= whiles conj.) 
huo'z 1, huoz 3 (== ivhose) 
ueizdum 
ueiz adj. 
ueiz sb. 

uitnez M (before a vowel) 
zat/eus M 
zakari M 
zebed M. 



§ 43- s. 
Instances of initial s and of s in such groups as sp, 
ps, st, ts &c. are not enumerated. For the ending -sion 
see § 28 (-ion). 



abius sb. 

akorns 

akue'ntans 

advansed 

advaunsment 

a*djes 

auluais 1, cf. z § 42 

aunsient 

artikls 

as O, not in M, cf. § 42 az 

a/yes M 

asiurans 



asiured 

autours 

bikaus, cf. z § 42 

bekums 

belongs 

birds 

bre*ds, bredes, cf. z § 42 

briefnes 

kalumniators 

kaused B, cf. z § 42 

kavilalations BC 

se-s M 



Word-Lists. 



117 



t/ois 

klo*s adj. 

komodious, cf. z § 42 

kompaTs 

komparison 1, -zon 2 

kompounds sb. 

kontraries 2, -iez 1 

kopies 

korupters 

kounsel sb. & vb. 

kountenans 

daundjerous 

derivasions 

dezeirous, cf. z § 42 

diferens, -es 

diph]?ongs 

diskuradjings 

disku'rs 

disorder, -dring 

distans 

divers +, diuers 1, deivers 3, 

deiuers 1 
diverslei 2, deiverslei 1 
elders 
els 

els-huer 

enirnies, cf. § 42 
epistls 
espesialei 
eksampl 01 M 1, exampl 01, 

exam pis 01, examples O 1 
exseling 



eksept +, exept 3 

exsepting 1, exepting 1 

exses 

exersi'z, -ez, -ing, cf. p. 28 

experiens 

figiurs 

florenteins 

fors, forsed 

for-faders 

forens 

gramarians 

gresians 

hebrius 1, -iuz 1 

hinderans 

his, cf. z § 42 

histori-ureiters 

inkre's sb. & vb. 

institusions 

instruksions 

enterliuds 

invensions 

inventors, -ters, cf. § 42 

is, cf. z §42 

djudjes 

laborers 

krburs 

langadjes 

las M 

ieters +, letters 1 

lords (only in the com- 
bination 3e lords pre'r), 
03 Ml 



118 


Word-Lists. 


maners 


present, cf. z § 42 


mens 


presentlei 1, prez- 1 


mrters 


primitivs 


michaelmas, mit/elmas 


prins, -es 


misplasing 


printers 


modes B (= moods) 


prosrdeth (th B) 


na'ms 


proses (= process) 


nasions 


prodjenitors 


nesesari 


pronouns vb. +, -nuns 1 


ni'ds 


(= pronounce) 


neuters 


pronunsiasion 


nikles (= Nicolas) 


rezons, reson, cf. § 42 


noblmans gen. 


rese'v, -d, -ing 


nurses 


rediused 


observasion 


rehers 


observed, -vd, -ving 


remembrans 


ofens 


romains 


ofis, -es 


skulma'sters 1, -masters 


orators 


skrupelus 


uders 


seas B 


ours 2, ourz 1 


selvs 0, selvz M 


parenthezis 


semiuo'kals 


pe*rs 3, pe'rz + 


sens 


person, -s 


sentens 


p]a*s+, -es 2, plases 1 


sisters 


plasing, ptersed 


sounds 


ple'ers 


spi't/es 


possessed MB 


strand jers 


pouers 


sufisient, -li, -lei 


predesesors 2, -ours 1 


siur, siuer 


premisez 


suiines 


preposisions 


silabls 



Word-Lists. 



119 



tenses 

tha'rns 

ders 1, de'rz 1 (= theirs) 

9ens M 

Jungs 

dis, diz, cf. z § 42 

thomas 

|)Ousandz M 

dus 

teims 

ti-tls 

tUDgS 

tu'ards 

transitori 

translating 

treatis, cf. z § 42 

trespasses M (before a pause) 



treifls 

tiutors, tutors 

uniuersali 

us, cf. z § 42 

ius, cf. z § 42 

verbs 

veises 1, vises 1 (= vices) 

vois, voises 

voels, cf. z § 42 

uas, cf. z § 42 

ue's (= ivays) 

huens 

hueras 1, -az + 

utcIs (= tvords) 

u'rdines 

ureiters (histori-). 



§ 44. h (medial and final). 

Cf. ih § 4, oh, ouk § 29. 
ah-ha M lauh M, lauhing 0, lauht 

dauhtr M inuht + (= mottgJit, might) 

aeht|) (= eigth) nehbur, -z M 

hah OM streht, er 

heh tauht 2, taught IB 

hehho M f)ruh 1, J>ru 1 (|>rulei 2). 

With regard to hah, heh (and hehho?), note Hart's 
words p. 39 a [h] "whose propertie is to signifie onely the 
breath without any meane of instrument or sound as we 
vse it before and after the sound of the vowell in laughing 
hah, or heh, &c." 

Further, h is used in the following words: 



120 



Word-Lists. 



alphabet 

apostrophe 

author 1, autor 3, autours 1 

chamel 1, kamel 2 

chandl 1, kandl 1, kandel 1 

choler 

khrist 1, krist M 2 

chronikl 

diphftongs +, diphthong + 

orthographi 

In all these words h is a half etymological, half 
phonetic sign of the aspiration of the stop (see above, 
p. 13), and th does not mean the sound ft. Hart wrote 
t and not th in Jcaterin and sabbot (= Catherine, sabbath). 
In rhetoric both h and c are due to the ordinary spelling. 

§ 45. Syllabic 1. 



parenthezis 

sathan 

tha'ms (= Thames) 

thomas 

thro'n 

theim (= thyme) 

thriakl (= treacle) 

thre'ziur 

thuni (= tunny). 



a-bl 1, abl 1 A 

ampl 

artikl, -s 

be-dl 

chandl 1, kandl 1, kandel 1 

kastl 

chronikl 

dubl +, dubled 2 

epistls 

ivl M 

eksampl M, exampl O, 

exampls 1, examples 

01 B 
d^entl OM 
habl (= able, cf. above) 



eidllei 

ketl 

la-dl M 

le'djibl 

litl 

mikl (northern = michle) 

no"blman 1, noblman 1 

no'tabl 

re'zonabl 3, rezonabl 1 

sa*bl 

simpl 1 , simple 1 B 

singl 

silabl, -s 

ta-bl 

titl, -s 



Word-Lists. 



121 



f)imbl M 

thriakl (= treacle) 



treifls 

trubl (troubled B). 



§ 46. Syllabic n. 

se"vn + 



kapn 

rvn 2, ivn 1, iven 1 

givn +, gi'vn 1 (dot doubtful) 

gotn 

hapn 

he'vn M 

oftn 

§ 47. Syllabic r. 
Not represented in 0, except perhaps in o'vr-it (1) 
as against over (1) and overmut/ (1). 



se'vn|) M 2, sevnft M 1 

spokn 

ta'kn 

tokn 

uritn. 



bridrn M 

t/ildrn M, t/ilder 02 

dauhtr M 

delivr M 

evrlasting M, ever- 

fadr 4, fadr 2M, fader O 

fi-dr M 

givr M, giver 

la'br M, labur 



makr M 

mu'dr M, muder 

murdr M 

strand-jr 

udr M, uder 0, uder 0, 

uder O 
remernbr M, remember 
undr M, under 
ua*tr M, ua'ter 0. 



§ 48. d or t 

without vowel in the ending -ed. 

Cf. -ed § 12. 

abiuzd aspird 

akustumd 1, -ed 2 bredd+, bredd 1A, breded 1 

afirmd kauld 

aledjd t/andgd 2, t/aundgd 1, 

apird t/aungd IB, t/andjed + 

8** 



122 



Word-Lists. 



koinpa*rd 

koinpozd A 

konse'vd M 

konstre'nd 

konte'nd 

kriusifeid M 

declaTd 

derivd +, derivd 2 A 

diskreibd 

devrzdl, deveiz2, deueizd 1 

ezd 

exprest 

fra'md 

lauht 

lernd ptc. 2, adj. 2, lerned 

adj. 7 
li'kt (= liked) 
namd 
obte'nd 



past 

pild (= pilled?) 

plezd A 

purpo"zd 

rese"vd 

retend A 

satis feid 

si'md 

servd 

/a'mfast 

/a-pt 

ste'd 1, ste'id 1 

sufferd M 

teid 

tout/t 

turnd 1, -ned 2 

unprikt 

iuzd. 



§ 49. 9' or d instead of 9e 

occurs before the following words: 

abirv-se*d autor, -s, author 

abius, abiuzd er£ M 

akiut e*r 

afein element 

alphabet emperour 

aunsient end 

apostrophe eror 

argument etimologi 

artikl eksampl 

aspirasion experiens 



Word-Lists. 



123 



orator 

order 

oridjinal 

orthographi 

uder, u'der, uder 

spesiaul (tu 3' sp.) 

understanding 

unlerned 

uper 

ins 

ual/ 

u'rd 2, de urd 1. 



hebriu; also de hebriu 2 

ignorant 

il 

iner 

instruments 

inuard 

invensions 

inventors 

italian 

old 

o*n 

opinion 

Thus the is shortened before vowels, including iu, 
and before w, and rarely before h and s; in M Hart 
writes de holli and de hous. The full form de occurs 
very rarely before a vowel, I have recorded only de old, 
de unexpert, de ei, de amendment and de element in 0; 
in M no instances are found. 

Compare also the elisions in b'asprrd = he aspired, 
houb'rt (note the long vowel) = liowbeit, az't-uer = as it 
were and hierbei't-iz = hereby it is. 

§ 50. t' instead of tu. 

occurs before ez (= ease) 

afekt obe* 

amend opo*z 

an-uder understand 

ani iuz. 
ate'n 

Cf. also d'understand (= do u.). 

•*• 



C. F. Wintersche Buchdruckerei. 



964 



PE Jespersen, Otto 

873 John Hart's 

H37J47 pronunciation of English 



PLEASE DO NOT REMOVE 
CARDS OR SLIPS FROM THIS POCKET 



UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO LIBRARY